FREE/BARGAIN — Non-Fiction

[GtrsRGr8]

Originally Posted by Little.Egret

Err, no.

Kindle Unlimited is a lending scheme. You can read for free but if you want to purchase you have to pay the stated price.

Actual freebies today

Ancient Egypt: A Captivating Guide to Egyptian History, Ancient Pyramids, Temples, Egyptian Mythology, and Pharaohs such as Tutankhamun and Cleopatra

Egyptian Mythology: A Fascinating Guide to Understanding the Gods, Goddesses, Monsters, and Mortals (Greek Mythology - Norse Mythology - Egyptian Mythology Book 3)

Franklin Roosevelt: A Captivating Guide to the Life of FDR

Winston Churchill: A Captivating Guide to the Life of Winston S. Churchill

Churchill and Roosevelt: A Captivating Guide to the Life of Franklin and Winston

Adolf Hitler: A Captivating Guide to the Life of the Führer of Nazi Germany

Jackie Kennedy: A Captivating Guide to the Life of Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis


https://www.amazon.com/s/?url=search...ry+Captivating

https://www.amazon.co.uk/s/?url=sear...ry+Captivating

https://www.amazon.ca/s/?url=search-...ry+Captivating

Genuine thanks for the correction; I don't mind at all being corrected, as long as it is done nicely. Besides, it is beneficial to Mobilereaders, and that's the most important thing.

I have never had Kindle Unlimited, so I am unfamiliar with it. But, I vaguely remember now the fact that the books are lent free to subscribers, and not given to them free. And, I gave the information about the Kindle Unlimited search hits only a cursory examination, or I would have noticed that $0.00 was not the purchase price for the Kindle Unlimited ebooks. The fact that you called the program a lending "scheme" leds me to believe that I'm not the only one who has been duped about that. But, at the very least, I should not have spoken with the certitude that I did.

Somehow my search did not catch the two Egypt titles, either. Thanks for adding them.

[HarryT]

What's wrong with calling it a lending scheme?

[GlenBarrington]

Originally Posted by HarryT

What's wrong with calling it a lending scheme?

Nuthin'

Personally, I'm a BIG fan of KU. I can read as much as I want for the price of a single Paperback book each month. Some books are awful, but many books are good, and a few are VERY good. Pretty much like anything else in life.

I recommend the KU available book "Beneath a Scarlet Sky" to all.

See the discussion below on MR:

https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=289526

[Little.Egret]

Originally Posted by Froide

Also (still) free today:
Haitian Revolution: A Captivating Guide to the Abolition of Slavery

Not free in UK

Try hourly history, free

Haitian Revolution: A History From Beginning to End


https://www.amazon.com/s/?url=search...Hourly+History

https://www.amazon.co.uk/s/?url=sear...Hourly+History

https://www.amazon.ca/s/?url=search-...Hourly+History

[GtrsRGr8]

Originally Posted by HarryT

What's wrong with calling it a lending scheme?

I didn"t understand why you would have said that, but then I noticed that you and Little.Egret both live in the U.K.

"Scheme" must not have the same connotation, or possibly even denotation, in the U.K. that it does in the U.S. As a native of the U.S., I think of it as having the negative connotation of something tricky or underhanded. The word "schemer" would have an even more definite negative connotation, one indicating that the person was planning to do something dishonest or crooked.

So, that's why I interpreted Little.Egret's words as I did.

[Little.Egret]

Originally Posted by GtrsRGr8

I didn"t understand why you would have said that, but then I noticed that you and Little.Egret both live in the U.K.

"Scheme" must not have the same connotation, or possibly even denotation, in the U.K. that it does in the U.S. As a native of the U.S., I think of it as having the negative connotation of something tricky or underhanded. The word "schemer" would have an even more definite negative connotation, one indicating that the person was planning to do something dishonest or crooked.

So, that's why I interpreted Little.Egret's words as I did.

Compare Ponzi scheme I suppose.

Yes, pension scheme, health scheme and so forth need have no such connotations in formal British English. Merriam-webster explains

[issybird]

Originally Posted by GtrsRGr8

I didn"t understand why you would have said that, but then I noticed that you and Little.Egret both live in the U.K.

"Scheme" must not have the same connotation, or possibly even denotation, in the U.K. that it does in the U.S. As a native of the U.S., I think of it as having the negative connotation of something tricky or underhanded. The word "schemer" would have an even more definite negative connotation, one indicating that the person was planning to do something dishonest or crooked.

So, that's why I interpreted Little.Egret's words as I did.

I'm an American and "lending scheme" is entirely understandable to me and his no negative connotations, much less denotation.

[HarryT]

"Scheme" has negative connotations in British English when used as a verb, but very rarely when used as a noun. As a noun it's simply a programme of action to be followed, ie a plan.

[GlenBarrington]

Originally Posted by GtrsRGr8

I didn"t understand why you would have said that, but then I noticed that you and Little.Egret both live in the U.K.

"Scheme" must not have the same connotation, or possibly even denotation, in the U.K. that it does in the U.S. As a native of the U.S., I think of it as having the negative connotation of something tricky or underhanded. The word "schemer" would have an even more definite negative connotation, one indicating that the person was planning to do something dishonest or crooked.

So, that's why I interpreted Little.Egret's words as I did.

It might be a regional thing, but in Central Illinois, I don't think it has quite the negative connotations you attribute to it.

[GtrsRGr8]

All of the above points have been thought-provoking, enlightening, and interesting.

The statements about regional differences have a ring of truth about them. I'm not so certain that that explains all of it, however. For one thing, I grew up (4th grade through high school) in the Midwest. I scrolled up to see, without finding it, where I mentioned that one of Merriam-Webster's (of _American_ English) definitions of the noun "scheme" can have at least a somewhat negative connotation, as it gave one definition (without noting that it was a regional use) of something to the effect of "a plan or program, _especially one which does not follow the usual rules_" (emphasis mine, G)).

I owe this thought to a comment of someone, above . . . . I think that I may have projected the connotations of, for example, the verbs "scheme," the adjective "scheming," and the noun "schemer" upon the noun that we're discussing, "scheme." Don't the first three of those words have a negative connotation to "everyone" in the U.S.? If projection was what I did, it was a definite no-no.

I have long thought that one of the greatest challenges, to a teacher of a very advanced level of a foreign language, would be imparting the myriad and enormous number of _subtilties_ (sp?) of that language!

Gotta go.

[4691mls]

Originally Posted by Little.Egret

Compare Ponzi scheme I suppose.

Yes, pension scheme, health scheme and so forth need have no such connotations in formal British English. Merriam-webster explains

In the US we usually use the word "plan" for this kind of thing (pension plan, health plan, etc.) I tend to think of "scheme" as something perhaps more calculating, whereas a plan is a neutral description. GtrsRGr8 and I are both southerners so perhaps it is a regional thing.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by 4691mls

In the US we usually use the word "plan" for this kind of thing (pension plan, health plan, etc.) I tend to think of "scheme" as something perhaps more calculating, whereas a plan is a neutral description. GtrsRGr8 and I are both southerners so perhaps it is a regional thing.

I see that "dictionary.com" (which is American) gives "plan" as the primary meaning, with the "dishonest" meaning second. In my British Chambers' dictionary, the dishonest meaning is in fourth place, so that would suggest that it's a much less common usage of the word in Britain.

[GlenBarrington]

Originally Posted by GtrsRGr8

All of the above points have been thought-provoking, enlightening, and interesting.

The statements about regional differences have a ring of truth about them. I'm not so certain that that explains all of it, however. For one thing, I grew up (4th grade through high school) in the Midwest. I scrolled up to see, without finding it, where I mentioned that one of Merriam-Webster's (of _American_ English) definitions of the noun "scheme" can have at least a somewhat negative connotation, as it gave one definition (without noting that it was a regional use) of something to the effect of "a plan or program, _especially one which does not follow the usual rules_" (emphasis mine, G)).

I owe this thought to a comment of someone, above . . . . I think that I may have projected the connotations of, for example, the verbs "scheme," the adjective "scheming," and the noun "schemer" upon the noun that we're discussing, "scheme." Don't the first three of those words have a negative connotation to "everyone" in the U.S.? If projection was what I did, it was a definite no-no.

I have long thought that one of the greatest challenges, to a teacher of a very advanced level of a foreign language, would be imparting the myriad and enormous number of _subtilties_ (sp?) of that language!

Gotta go.

I agree that a scheme implies an unusual Plan, but I've never seen it as automatically negative, but then again, I always seem to zig when everyone else zags.

[AnotherCat]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I see that "dictionary.com" (which is American) gives "plan" as the primary meaning, with the "dishonest" meaning second...

The Oxford English Dictionary gives similar.

I think here in NZ (and I think Australia too) "scheme" (n) is often used with the dishonest meaning, or when dishonesty is wished to be implied, especially by the news media. I usually do a double take when it is used anywhere.

For example the media will say "their plan" when describing someone's plan and they do not want to attach any dishonest connotation. But they will say "their scheme" when for malicious reasons they want to imply dishonesty without the risk of litigation.

I have worked in managing large projects for decades and if I asked someone to explain what they were going to do, I would never ask what their "scheme" was but ask what their "plan" was, as otherwise my question might be taken as insincere implying something unreliable. The English speaking countries I have worked in are Australia, New Zealand and USA and a developing country whose predominant business and government language was English, but I am not saying they all are inclined to take the dishonest interpretation, just that it is something I am alert to as a risk in maintaining trust across diverse groups.

[GA Russell]

Let me add another idea some of you have hinted at.

I think that "scheme" in the US often refers to a complicated plan, while "plan" refers to something simple unless used with the adjective "complicated."