David Block, December 2008: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with "{{Digger Activity |Digger=David Block |Digger Activity Date=2008/12/01 |Is Current=Yes |Digger Activity=<p><span>David contributed an article to the spring 2008 issue of ...") |
No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|Digger Activity Date=2008/12/01 | |Digger Activity Date=2008/12/01 | ||
|Is Current=Yes | |Is Current=Yes | ||
|Digger Activity=<p><span>David contributed an article to the spring 2008 issue of </span><em>Base Ball</em><span> on what is recognized as the earliest appearance of the word “base-ball,” the John Newbery’s 1744 </span><em>Little Pretty Pocket-Book.</em><span> </span><span>David examines some remaining mysteries of this source | |Digger Activity=<p><span>David contributed an article to the spring 2008 issue of </span><em>Base Ball</em><span> on what is recognized as the earliest appearance of the word “base-ball,” the John Newbery’s 1744 </span><em>Little Pretty Pocket-Book.</em><span> </span><span>David examines some remaining mysteries of this source (which gives us that ringing phrase, “the next destin’d post”) including whether we can claim 1744 as the year “base-ball” first saw print when no editions of the book are available prior to 1760, and whether the absence of a bat in the relevant woodcut means that the bat hadn’t yet joined the game – one can, of course, “bat” a ball with one’s hands, and the text only refers to a ball that is “struck off.”</span></p> | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 08:16, 17 June 2012
 |
| Add a digger |
| Add digger news |
| Email List |
| Digger | David Block |
|---|---|
| Digger Activity Date | December 2008 |
| Digger Activity | David contributed an article to the spring 2008 issue of Base Ball on what is recognized as the earliest appearance of the word “base-ball,” the John Newbery’s 1744 Little Pretty Pocket-Book. David examines some remaining mysteries of this source (which gives us that ringing phrase, “the next destin’d post”) including whether we can claim 1744 as the year “base-ball” first saw print when no editions of the book are available prior to 1760, and whether the absence of a bat in the relevant woodcut means that the bat hadn’t yet joined the game – one can, of course, “bat” a ball with one’s hands, and the text only refers to a ball that is “struck off.” |