Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

50901Re: [Czechlist] Re: Sights

Expand Messages
  • (no author)
    Feb 12, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      ------ Original Message ------
      From: "Melvyn" <zehrovak@...>
      To: Czechlist@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: 12.2.2013 13:42:36
      Subject: [Czechlist] Re: Sights
      > > > Zajimava mista/Points of interest
      >--- In Czechlist@yahoogroups.com, James Kirchner wrote:
      >> I think that in a title we'd more likely write "Things to see", but
      >"Sights" is okay.
      >Or maybe "sightseeing", "sightseeing spots" and the like?
      >Thanks Jamie and Melvyn.. yes, all viable, my main concern here was
      >that it was a sort of caption, rather than a category/heading, I would
      >be happier to use 'things to see' as a heading above a list of
      >pamatky, but as a standalone word superimposed over a photo of a
      >historical building (supposedly being one of the 'benefits' of the
      >office development in question, as in they make it sound as if pamatky
      >were part of what you get with your lease..), it didn't work for me..
      >Used sightseeing in the end.. It's an activity, strictly speaking, but
      >it seemed better than just 'sights'
      >> > Historicke pamatky/Historic sites
      >Note the difference between historic and historical:
      >Thanks for pointing that out, I had both historic and historical in
      >the text - I guess one could argue these sites/buildings are almost
      >always historic (as in important in history), as opposed to just
      >historical (old), but I avoided agonising over it by using Heritage
      >sites as you suggested...
      >Changed a few historic centres (of Prague) to historical centres,
      >Thanks again

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 15 messages in this topic