wrote in message
...
On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 18:11:51 +0000, Dave wrote:

Tim Challenger writes
On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 11:47:10 -0000, BAC wrote:

Perhaps the fact most English speakers are not Japanese speakers and
are
hence unlikely to be confused by possible quibbles regarding the
literal
meaning of the term is one reason many of us consider 'tsunami' a more
apt
term than 'tidal wave'.

I'd have thought that as most English speakers speak English, they might
be
more likely to know what the work tidalwave means that tsunami.

Well maybe the 100 or so Thai and other nationalities saved by an 11
year old girl shouting 'Tsunami' might disagree with you there. Had she
not have just studied it at school and recognised the sudden drop in the
shoreline water, they might all be dead.

IMHO some of these catastrophes deserve an unusual and unique title
recognised around the world. Words do change their meaning - tidal to me
implies something predictable, and a tidal wave means maybe a severn
bore or a predicted high water being pushed down the North Sea at a slow
rate of knots, not an unexpected two or three metre wall of several
cubic kilometres travelling at several hundred miles an hour.

Maybe you should have done O level geography 50 years ago.
Do you also get confused when talking about butterflies and slow
worms?

Whether or not he was one of the few lucky enough to have been selected to
take 'O' level geography 50 years ago, I believe he's helped support my
speculation that the term 'tidal wave' may be more likely to be
misunderstood, these days, than 'tsunami'.