Jan 22, 2004 06:54
20 yrs ago
English term
two-boxer
Non-PRO
English
Art/Literary
Warning: Don't read the ending in public if you don't have two tissues handy...it's a two -boxer"
Does "two-tissues" = 2 boxes of tissues>? and Does "two-boxer" mean "it make you need two boxes of tissues to absorb you tear"?
Does "two-tissues" = 2 boxes of tissues>? and Does "two-boxer" mean "it make you need two boxes of tissues to absorb you tear"?
Responses
3 +4 | a real tear-jerker | Jean-Luc Dumont |
5 +12 | Dear Buttercup, the answer to your question is "yes" | CMJ_Trans (X) |
1 +11 | two boxes of tissue | nyamuk |
4 | one-boxer/two-boxer | Mihaela Sinca |
5 -2 | It's dominating over you | Alex Zelkind (X) |
Responses
+4
11 hrs
Selected
a real tear-jerker
I think what maybe misleading here is that one can think if you need two tissues handy - just two ? - then why would that mean 2 boxes of tissues
well it is because you will cry so much that you will need to tissues at a time to stop the flow and will soon finish your two boxes :-)
it also depends on the brand :-) and absorbency of the paper - since the story is absorbing already
Reviewer: Tammy (see more about me) from Michigan
This is a wonderful feel good book that is definitely a two boxer. That's two boxes of Kleenexes that you'll need to get through this one! The very first story sets the tone for the whole book. This story about a mother and daughter and the love that they shared was the most touching and one of the best stories contained within. As with any anthology, with many authors, the writing style differs throughout and you may find yourself captured by one author and wanting to get rid of the next author all within the same chapter.
well it is because you will cry so much that you will need to tissues at a time to stop the flow and will soon finish your two boxes :-)
it also depends on the brand :-) and absorbency of the paper - since the story is absorbing already
Reviewer: Tammy (see more about me) from Michigan
This is a wonderful feel good book that is definitely a two boxer. That's two boxes of Kleenexes that you'll need to get through this one! The very first story sets the tone for the whole book. This story about a mother and daughter and the love that they shared was the most touching and one of the best stories contained within. As with any anthology, with many authors, the writing style differs throughout and you may find yourself captured by one author and wanting to get rid of the next author all within the same chapter.
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "Thank you very much everyone"
-2
17 mins
It's dominating over you
It's philosophical terms. "One-boxer" and "two-boxer". "One-boxer" is dominated, "two-boxer" dominates. Comes from boxing. Two-boxer is the one who can hit strong with both hands. One-boxer has one can which is not as strong as the other.
In your context, it hits you with both hands, from up and down, from left and right, with hooks, with uppercuts, with jabs, etc...
In your context, it hits you with both hands, from up and down, from left and right, with hooks, with uppercuts, with jabs, etc...
Peer comment(s):
neutral |
nyamuk
: Alex I like you man, but I think your talent would be better utilised writing original text rather than commenting on second hand material;)
30 mins
|
:)
|
|
neutral |
CMJ_Trans (X)
: Gareth Macmillan should read this! I'd love to know what you think you're playing at!
1 hr
|
Stop your personal attacs on me, I'm warning you for the first and the last time
|
|
disagree |
Gordon Darroch (X)
: where exactly do the tissues come into this scenario?
2 hrs
|
disagree |
Jörgen Slet
: fine as an original text though, as noted above :)
17 hrs
|
neutral |
RHELLER
: talking about tissues here
1 day 16 hrs
|
+11
42 mins
two boxes of tissue
A wild guess and maybe I'm just thick but I think she is saying that you need a lot of tissue to read this in public. Presumably the tissue is to wipe away the tears, although it could be to sneeze into because the book is mouldy, or to wipe the germs from all those icky public places that the book will be read in.
But I'll stop letting my imagination run, I think you had the answer all along.
But I'll stop letting my imagination run, I think you had the answer all along.
Peer comment(s):
agree |
Chris Rowson (X)
: :-)
13 mins
|
agree |
David Sirett
: Definitely - two boxes of tissues required to absorb tears generated by sentimental ending.
29 mins
|
agree |
jerrie
: Absolutely..raise your confidence...there can be no other answer!
1 hr
|
agree |
Gordon Darroch (X)
1 hr
|
agree |
PB Trans
: yes, but I think the "warning not to read in public" means that you will be embararrased or uncomfortable if you don't have enough tissues (imagine the mess on your face) :-)
6 hrs
|
agree |
Nado2002
8 hrs
|
agree |
Refugio
9 hrs
|
agree |
Jean-Luc Dumont
10 hrs
|
agree |
DGK T-I
13 hrs
|
agree |
Jörgen Slet
16 hrs
|
neutral |
RHELLER
: nothing to do with mold-I read it very carefully
1 day 16 hrs
|
You should read more carefully and if after doing so your position hasn't changed I am afraid I can not be of any further assistance to you. -Cheers
|
|
agree |
NancyLynn
: agree with 2 boxes -- and agree with Rita too, it has nothing to do with mold, but rather emotion
1 day 17 hrs
|
Tanks for your vote. re: moould. The tissue has as much to do with mould as it does the sanitation of icky public places. The answer was presented in a tongue in cheek fashion, and if that was not obvious I apologise for the confusion.
|
19 mins
one-boxer/two-boxer
See the site
Suppose that those members of the philosophical community who have both (i) thought seriously about Newcomb’s Problem and (ii) are familiar with the main arguments on both sides, are approximately evenly-divided between One-Boxers and Two-Boxers.[17] We can imagine various ways in which this state of disagreement gives way to a consensus. Here is one way: someone thinks of an ingenious argument that convinces all of the One-Boxers (or, alternatively, all of the Two-Boxers) that they have been in error up until now
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 43 mins (2004-01-22 07:37:39 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
the note give more details:
In his original presentation of Newcomb’s Problem, Robert Nozick wrote: “…I have put this problem to a large number of people…To almost everyone it is perfectly clear and obvious what should be done. The difficulty is that these people seem to divide almost evenly on the problem, with large numbers thinking that the opposing half is just being silly” (“Newcomb’s Problem and Two Principles of Choice”, page 48). My sense is that the by-now over three decades worth of sustained debate on Newcomb’s Problem has resulted in a significant shift in the original distribution of opinion in favor of a policy of Two-Boxing. But I will abstract away from this fact in what follows: what is crucial for my purposes is simply that there are some actual defenders of One-Boxing as well as some actual defenders of Two-Boxing.
Suppose that those members of the philosophical community who have both (i) thought seriously about Newcomb’s Problem and (ii) are familiar with the main arguments on both sides, are approximately evenly-divided between One-Boxers and Two-Boxers.[17] We can imagine various ways in which this state of disagreement gives way to a consensus. Here is one way: someone thinks of an ingenious argument that convinces all of the One-Boxers (or, alternatively, all of the Two-Boxers) that they have been in error up until now
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 43 mins (2004-01-22 07:37:39 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
the note give more details:
In his original presentation of Newcomb’s Problem, Robert Nozick wrote: “…I have put this problem to a large number of people…To almost everyone it is perfectly clear and obvious what should be done. The difficulty is that these people seem to divide almost evenly on the problem, with large numbers thinking that the opposing half is just being silly” (“Newcomb’s Problem and Two Principles of Choice”, page 48). My sense is that the by-now over three decades worth of sustained debate on Newcomb’s Problem has resulted in a significant shift in the original distribution of opinion in favor of a policy of Two-Boxing. But I will abstract away from this fact in what follows: what is crucial for my purposes is simply that there are some actual defenders of One-Boxing as well as some actual defenders of Two-Boxing.
Reference:
+12
1 hr
Dear Buttercup, the answer to your question is "yes"
It means that the story is the sort that has you weeping buckets (bucketfuls of tears) at the end. So you should prepare extra (two boxes, in actual fact) paper tissues, so that you can mop up the tears that are bound to flow
Peer comment(s):
agree |
airmailrpl
: finally some light!!
2 hrs
|
agree |
mbc
4 hrs
|
agree |
PB Trans
: that's it
4 hrs
|
agree |
Rajan Chopra
7 hrs
|
agree |
Nado2002
7 hrs
|
agree |
Jean-Luc Dumont
9 hrs
|
agree |
luzba
12 hrs
|
agree |
DGK T-I
12 hrs
|
agree |
Jörgen Slet
15 hrs
|
agree |
chica nueva
: It is a variation on the saying "It's a four-handkies movie" or three or five..., whatever the assessment is. (handkie = handkerchief) -> means 'prepare to take enough handkies' or 'don't go, if you don't like tear-jerkers'...
17 hrs
|
agree |
RHELLER
: absolutely!
1 day 15 hrs
|
agree |
NancyLynn
: easily identified idiom for native speakers
1 day 16 hrs
|
Something went wrong...