Curious.

[Jane]

Have a history teacher explain this if they can!
Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846.
John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946.
Abraham Lincoln was elected President of the USA in 1860.
John F. Kennedy was elected President of the USA in 1960.
Both were particularly concerned with civil rights.
Both wives lost a child while living in the White House.
Both Presidents were shot on a Friday.
Both Presidents were shot in the head.
Now it gets really weird.
Lincoln 's secretary was named Kennedy.
Kennedy's Secretary was named Lincoln.
Both were assassinated by Southerners.
Both were succeeded by Southerners named Johnson.
Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Lincoln, was born in 1808.
Lyndon Johnson, who succeeded Kennedy, was born in 1908.
John Wilkes Booth, who assassinated Lincoln, was born in 1839.
Lee Harvey Oswald, who assassinated Kennedy, was born in 1939.
Both assassins were known by their three names.
Both names are composed of fifteen letters.
Now hang on to your seat !
Lincoln was shot at the theater named "Ford."
Kennedy was shot in a car called "Lincoln " made by "Ford."
Booth and Oswald were assassinated before their trials.
And here's the "kicker":
A week before Lincoln was shot, he was in Monroe, Maryland .
A week before Kennedy was shot, he was with Marilyn Monroe.
and Lincoln was shot in a theater and the assassin ran to a warehouse.
Kennedy was shot from a warehouse and the assassin ran to a theater.
Creepy, huh?

I read this somewhere, I´m still trying to confirm some of the facts given..,
but I just wanted to share it here and see what you guys think, especially those of you from the States.
And if there´s a history teacher here...

[mxchana]

Hi Jane - boy it is fun to see that old chestnut resurface. I have no doubt that much of it may be true ... it started circulating within weeks after Kennedy was shot (I'm giving away my age here). It always struck me that someone picked around for all the facts that were similar ... and ignored all the things that didn't match about the two cases... It doesn't take a very long list of similarities to make it seem creepy, does it?

I recall the original had more detail about the secretaries, there was something about each one being warned by the secretary not to go... I wonder if anyone saved a copy of it from 1963... btw, the original didn't have the line about Maryland / Marilyn Monroe, I have my doubts about that, it was added by someone along the way.

Thanks for sharing! Hope we hear from a historian... or a serious packrat...

[marsha4christ2001]

Can all that information be so coincidentally similar. That is very weird.

[Rusty]

I always like to see what snopes.com has to say:
http://www.snopes.com/history/americ...ln-kennedy.asp

Some of the statements are true, others are not. And, like mxchana said, the Monroe, Maryland/Marilyn Monroe coincidence was a recent addition.

[mxchana]

Thanks Rusty, for referring us to Snopes - very interesting.

[sosia]

I always use snopes, it's a very good place for this kind of spam.
greetings

[Jane]

Well, what can I say?
Thanks Rusty for that link, as Mxchana said it´s quite interesting to see the facts.
We didn´t need a historian after all to get the facts, or are you one Rusty?

[Rusty]

I'm no historian. I use snopes.com to get the facts about any email that is circulated.

[Alfonso]

Hi Jane, it's worthwhile reading your post. I don't think it matters if it is true or false. Anyone can have his or her own conclusion, especially after reading Rusty's link. I think this kind of simple and intriguing text can help to learn English. Moreover, for you, English speakers, maybe Lincoln and Kennedy's stories are more or less known. For me, many things put me in the path for more knowledge. I appreciate that.

Any correction will be welcomed.

[Marsopa]

Hi, Alfonso,

Since you specifically asked, I think that the phrase is "will be welcome" not welcomed.

And I am not sure at all what you meant by "behind the clue..." but it sounded interesting!

[Alfonso]

Thanks a lot, Marsopa,
By behind the clue I tried to mean that now I have a clue, a line, a way, something to follow to get forward information.
I Know it's a literal translation from Spanish: estar tras la pista de algo. So, I don't get really surprised if it's wrong.
But, what would you say to mean what I tried?

Estoy tras la pista de un libro del que he oído hablar...

Me puso tras la pista de los diamantes / del asesino...

Thanks a lot. Any correction will be welcome.

[poli]

Estoy tras la pista parece hot on the trail en inglés. The police are hot on the trail of the recently escaped criminal.
Se puede decir en español, "La policía está tras la pista del criminal recienmente escapado"?

[Rusty]

Marsopa said:

... I think that the phrase is "will be welcome" not welcomed.

Alfonso is correct to use either welcomed or welcome. It depends on what he wants to convey. The former (welcomed) is a participle; the latter (welcome), an adjective.
The phrase 'will be welcomed' expresses action on the part of the speaker. He welcomes correction. The phrase 'will be welcome' implies that the correction itself is agreeable.

[Alfonso]

Wow Rusty, thanks a lot for your information.

Yes, Poli, you can:

Originally Posted by poli

Estoy tras la pista parece hot on the trail en inglés. The police are hot on the trail of the recently escaped criminal.
Se puede decir en español, "La policía está tras la pista del criminal recientemente escapado / huido"?

Is it correct: Many things put me hot on the trail of a forward knowledge?
Or: That smell (the clue) put me hot on the trail of the killer?

[Rusty]

Investigators use the phrase hot on the trail when they believe capture of the criminal is imminent. They wouldn't use the phrase if the case was riddled with dubious clues. They would be putting the pieces (of the puzzle) together.

Tras la pista could also be translated on the trail, which is less emphatic. The movie Trail of the Pink Panther is translated Tras la Pista de la Pantera Rosa.

This sentence is great:

That smell (the clue) put me hot on the trail of the killer.

This sentence doesn't make much sense to me:

Many things put me hot on the trail of a forward knowledge.

What are you trying to say? Having a forward knowledge means that you know about something beforehand (not the same as foreknowledge).

[Alfonso]

Thanks a lot, Rusty,
I think I can see it clearly now.

Since I can see now the difference between forward knowledge and foreknowledge (I put all the pieces together), I know that what I wanted to say was: Many things put me hot on the trail of a foreknowledge.
I hope this will be OK!

[Rusty]

Hmmm, not quite. Foreknowledge is to know about something before it happens. In Spanish, it's presciencia.

I've been wondering if you're trying to say, "Many things put me on the path to more knowledge." Path and trail are both translations of pista, but we prefer to use path in this sense.

[Alfonso]

Great, Rusty, you've got it!

Many things put me on the path to more knowledge.

It's been hard, but it was worth the wait!

Anyway, I think I got confused with three words: forward, fore- and further.

I know, for you, three of them are completely different. But, for me, all of them begin with an f.

Presciencia no se usa mucho. Se puede utilizar adivinación, profecía / adivinar, profetizar / adivino-a / profeta.

Corrections are welcomed.

[Rusty]

Yes, you could very well use further in your sentence instead of more.

[Tomisimo]

Originally Posted by Marsopa

Hi, Alfonso,

Since you specifically asked, I think that the phrase is "will be welcome" not welcomed.

And I am not sure at all what you meant by "behind the clue..." but it sounded interesting!

While this is grammatically correct, I think the most natural way of expressing cualquier corrección es bienvenida, would be something like: Any and all corrections (to my English) are welcomed. Or I welcome all corrections to my English.

Alfonso, you speak English very well, so I'm just trying to help you smooth down the odd rough edge here and there.