Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Howlin
It's pretty nit-picky but "Queen Mary II" would look so much classier.
4 posted on 04/22/2004 9:42:36 AM PDT by Psycho_Bunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Psycho_Bunny
I'll "pick" with you....I agree.

6 posted on 04/22/2004 9:45:15 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: Psycho_Bunny
I guess they want to be clear that the ship is the second of the name "Queen Mary", in honor of George V's wife, and not named for the sovereign Queen Mary II of the late 1600s.

I agree that some grace is lost.
26 posted on 04/22/2004 1:05:27 PM PDT by HostileTerritory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: Psycho_Bunny
It's pretty nit-picky but "Queen Mary II" would look so much classier.

It would also be most improper.

This is the second vessel named the Queen Mary (Queen Mary 2), not the first vessel named for the second Queen Mary (which is what Queen Mary II would mean).
29 posted on 04/22/2004 1:36:52 PM PDT by tjwmason (A voice from Merry England.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson