Thai coffee is really interesting: it's usually not just coffee. The most common brand I see — this one — is actually only 50% coffee, along with roasted corn and soy. Other common ingredients are sesame, cardamom, and rice. So, similar to Viet coffee in that it's sort of filled out with lesser ingredients, but the flavor profile of Thai coffee is pretty unique

If you live in a city with a sizeable Asian community there's a reasonable chance you can get actual Vietnamese coffee these days, usually cheaper than any of the New Orleans chickory blends. (Trung Nguyen, the leading Viet brand, seems to've greatly expanded their availability in the US in the past decade or so.) And a Vietnamese coffee filter is usually only 3 or 4 bucks. Cafe du Monde is often available at regular American grocery stores, but at a pretty steep markup for what it is.

The key is that Vietnamese coffee generally isn't Arabica coffee, the smooth variety most common in American coffee these days; it simply doesn't grow well in Vietnam. It's mostly Robusta, which is rather bitter, along with other 'inferior' varieties. This, combined with the long extraction of a traditional Vietnamese drip filter, leads to a very strong, bitter brew that stands up well to the cloying sweetness of the sweetened condensed milk. Chickory provides that same bitterness, which is why New Orleans coffee is often basically half coffee and half milk (and usually with some sugar too). If you try to make either New Orleans or Vietnamese coffee with an Arabica, even a strong, dark roast, it just doesn't have the bitterness you need to make it taste right.

Unfortunately this is BS. The term is attested nearly 40 years before Zangara's sentencing. Two earlier attestations from the OED:

1894 Rocky Mountain News (Denver). 12 Mar. 3. " Thomas Jordan, who occupies a cell in the death row at Canon City Penitentiary."

1902 Salt Lake Tribune. 23 June. "Six men now occupy cells in ‘death row’ at the [Utah] penitentiary."

This appears to be one of them. Can't figure out the second. While that guy appears to've returned purely for financial reasons, the first Mormon missionaries to Hawaii arrived from SF during the Gold Rush years, so the timeline works for one of them to've returned as a missionary. Mormonism is still pretty big in Hawaii and throughout the Pacific islands. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter-day_Saints_in_Hawaii

"Turnpike" and "pike" is def a NE thing. In most other places they're are just called toll roads or highways.

I'm assuming they mean they only learned it was "pike" rather than "pipe" recently,.since it's a commonly cited mondegreen — or as reddit calls it, a r/BoneAppleTea.

Pike meaning "highway" is a shortening of turnpike, a term for a toll road most commonly encountered in the US Northeast, as u/jungl3j1m points out. So it's basically just "coming down the road". But to folks who don't call highways "pikes", it is often interpreted as "pipe".

A turnpike was originally a type of military defense that was used to stop horses or vehicles from going down a road — either like a cheval de fries or a turnstile — a set of pikes, turning around a central axis. Eventually it meant any sort of barrier, and then the road on which such a barrier might exist, i.e. a toll road.

A drop in the bucket, but worth noting at least that the supposed meaning of Anna, Illinois, given in that article is a backronym. It was named for the founder's wife. While portmanteaus aren't unheard of for town names (hello, Texarkana), acronyms aren't generally a thing.

First usage in American literature, but the phrase is much older. Billy Shakes used a florid variant in King Lear in 1608: "One that..art nothing but the composition of a knaue, begger, coward, pander, and the sonne and heire of a mungrell bitch."

*lorises

You're off by an order of magnitude. Per the FDA:

"A CT examination with an effective dose of 10 millisieverts [an abdominal CT averages 8] [...] may be associated with an increase in the possibility of fatal cancer of approximately 1 chance in 2000. This increase in the possibility of a fatal cancer from radiation can be compared to the natural incidence of fatal cancer in the U.S. population, about 1 chance in 5 (equal to 400 chances in 2000). [...] If you combine the natural risk of a fatal cancer and the estimated risk from a 10 mSv CT scan, the total risk may increase from 400 chances in 2000 to 401 chances in 2000."

400 in 2000 to 401 in 2000 is a change of 20% to 20.05%.

One abdominal CT is not "lots of harmful radiation".

Do you have a source for any of that? I can't find anything resembling the supposed Hindu word, nor any use of "nobby" for cops.

Perhaps you are thinking of the association of the nickname Nobby with the name Clark (which is derived from clerk)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobby

Ahh, "humor". I see

Don't reckon they were singing about Adi having one ball during the American Civil War...

"TIL a food dish no one outside of Detroit has ever heard of was created in Detroit"

Good point! Language be weird like that.

Which is actually partially derived from who, going back to the Proto-Germanic terms equivalent to who + like. And in Middle English which was used where Modern English uses who, as in the King James version of the Lord's Prayer: "Our Father, which art in heaven..."

And what and who are derived from the same root, which is how they both wound up having the same genitive form whose, rather than having whose and something like whats.

Personally I think it'd be fine if we got to the point where who & which became interchangeable or one replaced the other, as there's fundamentally no reason to distinguish between the two. Like, I've noticed a resurgence in people using whom — often incorrectly — and quite frankly we just need to let that word die, as there's no case where its job can't be done just as well by who.

But we're far from that point, and using who as OP did will still strike the overwhelming majority of users as an error (unlike using who for whom, which only the most ardent of pedants will truly wrinkle their noses at). So it's probably best avoided, and only used when referring to people and not objects.

> a small steamer who

Contrary to popular belief, even though they are traditionally referred to as "she", boats are not, in fact, people. You want which

Ha, no worries. 99.99% of the time "association" is a noun, and it's rare to hear it referred to in full as "association football", so your confusion was understandable, even if you'd been a native English speaker. Hence my giving the rather drawn-out explanation, rather than simply leaving it at that first line :)

It's the International Federation of Association Football. "Association" here is an adjective, not a noun.

Back in the day, each school that played "football" had their own rules. There were Cambridge rules, Eton rules, etc. Eventually a group — the Football Association — got together to try to agree to a standard set of rules. The result was "association football". The folks that didn't agree to the rules that barred running with the ball in hand and heavy contact broke off and formed the Rugby Football Union, whose rules were based off those used at Rugby School. Eventually some of those rugby folks would give us American and Canadian football (aka "gridiron football")

"Association" is the source of the word "soccer", though British school slang (association > assoc > soc > soccer; compare "rugger" for rugby).

You'll still sometimes hear football/soccer called "association" in places like Australia, which has an abundance of footballs they need to differentiate (rugby league, rugby union, Aussie rules).

What the link actually says (emphasis mine):

"Rajendra may have named the city Singapura (“Lion City”), later corrupted to Singapore, or the name may have been bestowed in the 14th century by Buddhist monks, to whom the lion was a symbolic character. According to the Sejarah Melayu, a Malay chronicle, the city was founded by the Srīvijayan prince Sri Tri Buana; he is said to have glimpsed a tiger, mistaken it for a lion, and thus called the settlement Singapura."

I don't see any other sources attributing the naming to Rajendra Chola I. The name change from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temasek to Singapura is generally noted as occuring in the 1300s, centuries after his forays into the area. Most attribute it to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sang_Nila_Utama](Sang Nila Utama), though some scholars contend he didn't even exist. There seems to be general agreement that "lion city" is indeed the meaning, though there are several other proposed etymologies, and how it came to have that name is far from settled.