On Sat, 25 Jan 2003 09:24:23 -0800, Keith Whaley wrote:
> > There used to be a compact version of the OED. It was one volume with
> > very thin paper. The print was so small it came with a magnifier so
> > you could actually read it.
>
> Sheeet, man, I do that NOW!
:-)
Seriously, though, he
Doug Franklin wrote:
>
> On Sat, 25 Jan 2003 06:15:30 -0800, Keith Whaley wrote:
>
> > I don't think I have room in my little house for a proper reference
> > work, as they are huge and take up a lot of space.
>
> There used to be a compact version of the OED. It was one volume with
> very th
Mark Roberts wrote:
>
> Keith Whaley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I don't think I have room in my little house for a proper reference
> >work, as they are huge and take up a lot of space.
> Aren't they available on CD-ROM or DVD? I think you can get the OED on
> CD-ROM, at least.
Consider
On Sat, 25 Jan 2003 06:15:30 -0800, Keith Whaley wrote:
> I don't think I have room in my little house for a proper reference
> work, as they are huge and take up a lot of space.
There used to be a compact version of the OED. It was one volume with
very thin paper. The print was so small it cam
Keith Whaley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I don't think I have room in my little house for a proper reference
>work, as they are huge and take up a lot of space.
Aren't they available on CD-ROM or DVD? I think you can get the OED on
CD-ROM, at least.
--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.r
Mike Johnston wrote:
>
> > Webster's Second
>
> I found this brief little web-soundbite about Webster's Second. It lays out
> the story fairly well:
>
> http://www.inu.org/bieyi/cruises/webster.htm
Great info!
I've been saving this post to be answered, but haven't got around to
it for some r
John Coyle
Brisbane, Australia
- Original Message -
From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2003 1:56 AM
Subject: Re: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor
> Graywolf, Keith,
>
> Note that in ce
PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 10:56 AM
Subject: Re: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor
> Graywolf, Keith,
>
> Note that in certain contexts, linguists and grammarians distinguish
> between "standard written English" and spoken English almost as
> though t
>> I think Shakespeare "invented" a couple of dozen words. There's no
> problem
> with a language evolving. Otherwise, we'd all still be talking like the
> King James Bible.<
Yeah, but Shakespeare was Shakespeare. (That is, whoever he was. ) That
doesn't necessarily excuse bureaucrats using "i
Graywolf, Keith,
Note that in certain contexts, linguists and grammarians distinguish
between "standard written English" and spoken English almost as
though they are two different dialects. Does that happen in other
languages as well?
-- Glenn
-
From: "Keith Whaley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 4:55 AM
Subject: Re: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor
> It occurred to me a number of years ago, that if a non-native speaker
> depends on the written word to help him
ssage -
From: "William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 7:37 PM
Subject: Re: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Treena"
> Subject: Re: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Co
the effort: particularly in this forum, which
> must be an aid to those who are not in learning/improving their grasp of the
> language.
>
> John Coyle
> Brisbane, Australia
> - Original Message -
> From: "Doug Brewer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTE
ssage -
From: "Doug Brewer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, January 24, 2003 12:00 AM
Subject: Re: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor
> There are some usages that I find distracting. However, I consider it far
> more important that the memb
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
>
> .
> Someone in the business of,
> I believe, loan brokering, had this line on imprinted on the bottom of their
> stationery: Tell someone who cares.
>
That made my day, Ann. ROFLOL!
Dan Scott wrote:
>
> > "Got" is a curse.
> > Paul
> >
>
> Thanks Paul. I think I've got it now.
>
By God, I think Dan's got it! He's got it!
Paul
On Thursday 23 January 2003 08:22 pm, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
> This goes for some idiomatic expressions that mean quite different >
> things across boarders and oceans. Getting "knocked-up" in Great
> Britain vs. USA, for instance.
Then there is the generational differences in idiomatic express
- Original Message -
From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 9:14 PM
Subject: RE: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor
> This is stoopid!
>
> Yes the 'ad-writer' needed their copy reviewed - b
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 11:59:23 -0500, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
> Peter Alling wrote:
> > I always prefer "As if I cared", it's short and to the point.
> I believe, loan brokering, had this line on imprinted on the bottom of their
> stationery: Tell someone who cares.
My preference is DILLIGAF.
TTYL,
Then, those features are mis-named.
Your car or computer is notifying you of an event that's already happened,
not warning you. They aren't warnings, and shouldn't be called such, imho.
OTOH, the "oil" light in a car warns that the oil pressure is low, and that
if the matter isn't looked into, d
I haven't even read one yet, but I thank you for that list.
I WILL read 'em & I'll get back to you.
keith whaley
William Robb wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Keith Whaley"
> Subject: Re: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor
>
> &
Hi,
Thursday, January 23, 2003, 2:25:24 PM, you wrote:
> And then, there are those who use "to" in place of "too" while criticizing
> others grammar. (Sorry, I couldn't resist).
tooché!
Bob
(wouldn't that be "others' grammar"?...)
- Original Message -
From: "Keith Whaley"
Subject: Re: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor
> I suppose you can support that hazy assumption?
http://www.cadu.org.uk/malchooprs.htm
Paragraphs 13 & 14 are particularly interesting.
http://www.iacenter.org/depleted/me
Quoth Mishka:
> > Mathematically, however, we always say "three is
> > less than five"; the symbol "<" is called "less
> > than". Interesting that when we actually compare
> > numbers we use the amount word, not the number word.
> it sounds *very* logical: "three" is a noun/object here, and a
It depends on which you prefer. ;-)
On Thursday 23 January 2003 08:22 pm, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
> This goes for some idiomatic expressions that mean quite different >
> things across boarders and oceans. Getting "knocked-up" in Great
> Britian vs. USA, for instance.
--
Ken Archer Canine Pho
it sounds *very* logical: "three" is a noun/object here, and as objects, "three"-s are
definitely not countable -- how many different "three"-s you can come up with? paul
stregevsky mentioned a very good rule to see if this is a "mass" noun -- can you put
"a" before it? "a three"? -- from which
knows you were only supposed to wear a bit of blue paint.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: "Treena" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 11:55 AM
Subject: Re: OT: Obnoxious Sonofab
Well, no, I'd really rather not get into one here. I just HATE to let
folks get away with throwing "facts" around like that, without being
called upon to... etc. Okay, okay. Sorry.
I'll back off and not mention it again. I'll try, Doug, honest!
keith
Doug Brewer wrote:
>
> Do we =really= n
Uggg! I left out the 'k.'
The word was supposed to be 'knew.'
Might as well been Gnu!
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote:
>
> > For some reason, I never new what a thorn was. Now I know it was a
> > Runic letter, representing the sound "th."
> Well, an English letter (as well as being in some Scanda
Do we =really= need to start up another guns/weapons/geopolitical
penis-measuring debate?
I would vote no.
At 01:05 PM 1/23/03, you wrote:
William Robb wrote:
> What is the time span needed for something to be called a weapon of mass
> destruction (if we are going to put the term into the la
William Robb wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Treena"
> Subject: Re: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor
>
> > If we're going to use the phrase "mass destruction," and I suppose we are
> > since it seems to be officiall
- Original Message -
From: "Treena"
Subject: Re: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor
> If we're going to use the phrase "mass destruction," and I suppose we are
> since it seems to be officially sanctioned by the UN, how much does it
have
> to de
Hi Graywolf,
on 23 Jan 03 you wrote in pentax.list:
>Heck, Doug, most of the folks from non-English speaking countries here on
>the list write English better than most of us from English speaking
>countries. I suspect that is because they learned formal English before they
>learned colloquial Eng
- Original Message -
From: "Keith Whaley"
Subject: Re: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor
>
>
> Peter Alling wrote:
> >
> > Since, mass can be neither created or destroyed?
>
> A mass of people can...
The mass will still exist, only the form will be altered.
William Robb
Peter Alling wrote:
> I always prefer "As if I cared", it's short and to the point.
>
Regardsing "caring" - I just remembered a gaff a friend told me about.
Someone in the business of,
I believe, loan brokering, had this line on imprinted on the bottom of their
stationery: Tell someone who cares.
> For some reason, I never new what a thorn was. Now I know it was a
> Runic letter, representing the sound "th."
Well, an English letter (as well as being in some Scandanavian
alphabets currently) ... I'm not sure whether it also showed up
in Runic or not (I'll have to check).
And you're welcom
Dan Scott noted:
> I certainly enjoy reading all the 'commentates' on the subject—back
> formation grows strange fruit.
Then you might also be amused to note that "boxen" shows up about
as often as "boxes" as the plural of "box" in the hackish dialect.
And "Vaxen" is used way more often than "Vax
wise we'd go back to countries
fighting with bows and arrows, and sharp, pointy sticks.
- Original Message -
From: "Dan Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 10:14 AM
Subject: Re: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor
On Thursday 23 January 2003 04:18 pm, Dan Scott wrote:
> > course al the writer meant "I have the answer. I need another
> > lens." "Got" is a curse.
> > Paul
>
> Thanks Paul. I think I've got it now.
That is classic
--
Ken Archer Canine Photography
San Antonio, Texas
"Business Is Going To The
I think I would call that insensitive. But, then what do I know.
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: "Fred" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 10:06 AM
Subject: Re: OT:
Mathematically, however, we always say "three is less than five"; the
symbol "<" is called "less than". Interesting that when we actually
compare numbers we use the amount word, not the number word.
> Also, I'm so sorry about this, but I'm about to ramp up into
schoolmaster
> mode. I do this ev
> Heck, Doug, most of the folks from non-English speaking countries
> here on the list write English better than most of us from English
> speaking countries. I suspect that is because they learned formal
> English before they learned colloquial English.
I believe that this is often true.
> I wou
Hi, Paul.
> In Great Britain, company names are considered plural, so they are
> combined with plural verbs.
...which to me seems illogical. ;-)
> In America we frequently use a singular verb with a company name,
> then combine it with a plural pronoun. "Pentax has the resources
> to develop a
My comments one screen down, please...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In a message dated 1/23/2003 1:40:22 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > I once worked with an advertising director who was like this. She was
> > responsible for writing house ads, but as a writer she wa
> -Original Message-
> From: T Rittenhouse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >
> I would also suggest that anyone who seriously corrects
> someone's writing
> publicly is insensitive, impolite, or deliberately obnoxious.
It's the same when correcting someone during conversation. I suspect
that'
003 9:00 AM
Subject: Re: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor
> There are some usages that I find distracting. However, I consider it far
> more important that the members of the list who do not have a Master's
> level command of the English language, whether because of location of
Peter Alling wrote:
>
> Since, mass can be neither created or destroyed?
A mass of people can...
keith
> At 08:47 PM 1/23/2003 -0600, you wrote:
>
> > > On Thursday 23 January 2003 12:53 am, Mike Johnston wrote:
> > > > Anybody got any other favorites?
> >
> >Weapons of mass destruction.
>
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
>
[...]
> Recently I received an email from someone on ebay who hope I could find a
> particular item for her.
> She wrote the entire email in CAPS. She was - um - about my age and on AOL.
> So I try to help
> by saying it is considered shouting to type in CAPS. She then
What, you don't like baby talk, Cotty?
Ciao,
Graywolf
http://pages.prodigy.net/graywolfphoto
- Original Message -
From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Pentax List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 4:26 AM
Subject: Re:
"Mike Johnston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 4:03 AM
Subject: Re: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor
> Hi,
>
> Thursday, January 23, 2003, 12:58:33 AM, you wrote:
>
> > You do know why American split infinities, don't you? It's because
Certainly one of the reasons I didn't feel too sad when I left AOL,
was getting rid of that inane, grating "You've got MAIL!"
Curse you, AOL!
They, more than anyone else, will be responsible for generations of
kids who won't know how to use the word "got."
keith
Paul Stenquist wrote:
>
> Languag
I have been seeing this a lot in truck driving school. Some of the
instructors are real back seat drivers, they correct you before you do
anything. Some are a bit better, they correct you while you are doing
something. The one I had yesterday let you drive the truck. He did not
comment on ineptness
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Alling"
Subject: Re: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor
> >Weapons of mass destruction.
> Since, mass can be neither created or destroyed?
No.
William Robb
Correcting the editor (laugh), Enormously serious attempt!
This is something I really wanted to do for a time. Correcting an
editor I just got back a manuscript from an editor... who which
what well
Dear Sir, You keep coming away from the subject by referring to
linguists when in fact y
In Great Britain, company names are considered plural, so they are
combined with plural verbs. In America we frequently use a singular verb
with a company name, then combine it with a plural pronoun. "Pentax has
the resources to develop a DSLR. They will probably release it this
spring." I'm sorry,
Very strange, Ann. I think writing in caps was popularized by the
original Apple//, which wrote only in caps. Thus some of the first
bulletin boards and e-mail letters were in caps. (Remember when we sent
e-mail by dialing someone's home modem with a long telecommunication
script, then uploading th
Sent: 23 January 2003 03:20
> To: 'Pentax-Discuss'
> Subject: Re: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor
>
>
> Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> LESS is an amount or volume word. FEWER is a number word.
>
> Mike is correct. In English, "less" modifi
sages with
urls, technical terms and words which are not in the computer's
dictionary.
That's my rant done...
Rob
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 23 January 2003 08:32
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: OT: Obnox
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Not everyone is going to love the written word. Some of us just
> view it as a means to an end. That's just a fact of life.
Sure, but it's not black and white. You've actually put your finger
right on it when you say the written word is "a means to an end".
When you
Hi,
Mike J wrote:
> The researchers finally determined that the same lack of judgment ability
> that actually made you _bad_ at the skill to begin with was actually the
> same deficiency that made you unable to see yourself clearly.
this describes virtually every exponent of "management" that
I'v
Hi,
Thursday, January 23, 2003, 3:11:23 AM, you wrote:
> Tried to send this earlier, but was having mail problems.
> Who the hell coined the word "preventative"? I always thought it should be
> "preventive"
yeah! Somebody ought to imeddiately draught some sort of "law" to
preventate those sort
>Anybody got any other favorites?
Yeah, now you mention it. When people write:
'My bad.'
...My bad . what? It's an incomplete sentence and a non-sequitur,
surely?
Like me writing:
My big.
;-)
Cotty
Oh, swipe me! He paints with light!
http://www.maca
Hi,
Thursday, January 23, 2003, 12:58:33 AM, you wrote:
> You do know why American split infinities, don't you? It's because Fowler*
> actually approved of the practice--he thought it was pedantic to disallow it
> categorically. We promptly stopped teaching grammar in grammar schools and
> have b
Hi,
Thursday, January 23, 2003, 12:33:14 AM, you wrote:
> Split is a bad way to have one's infinitives, all right. And while I may
> split infinitives with Yankee abandon, at least we know the difference
> between a comma and a period. Have you noticed that your countrymen are
> preferring commas
Hi,
Thursday, January 23, 2003, 2:12:00 AM, you wrote:
>>
>> Impossibly complex and long winded sentences, e.g., an entire paragraph
>> that's one sentence. This rarely happens in spoken English, but is the
>> bane of written English.
that's because in spoken language there are no sentences or
...Now you know why they're called a Whinge of Journalists ;-)
>Also, I'm so sorry about this, but I'm about to ramp up into schoolmaster
>mode. I do this every now and then, and I *know* it's obnoxious. I'm fully
>aware that *most* of you are smarter and better educated than I am and just
>as ca
In a message dated 1/23/2003 1:40:22 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I once worked with an advertising director who was like this. She was
> responsible for writing house ads, but as a writer she was beyond bad--she
> was _awful_. She couldn't punctuate, her word choice was
In a message dated 1/23/2003 1:40:22 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Well, anyway. There are always going to be people around who claim that
> basic correctness in verbal expression is just an annoying distraction that
> we would all gratefully dispense with if we could just
"Doug Franklin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Their, there, and they're.
...and the belief some seem to hold that the poor apostrophe is a
character used to warn the reader that he's about to observe the
letter "s" at the end of a word.
Here's a cute little quotation I came across a few years ag
ok - how about phrases like "I literally could not believe my eyes!" Or, as
a significant variation on the theme, "I literally died when I saw that!"
Most often if not always the speaker/writer intends "virtual" when they say
"literal".
I just had to advantage this thread to get that off my chest
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 23:51:14 -0500, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
> Scary, eh?
Some people are born without a brain, others have it removed later. :-)
TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 20:51:43 -0600, Ed Matthew wrote:
> "Gotta" ain't right neither .
Yeah, well, what can I say. I'm a slacker. :-)
TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
Mike Johnston wrote:
> > My pet peeve is people who use the phrase "begs the question" when
> > they don't know what it means (they think it means "raises the
> > question").
>
> A couple of pet peeves:
>
> "one of the only" (it's either "the only" or "one of the few")
>
> (snp)
>
> Anybody got a
On Wednesday, January 22, 2003, at 06:46 PM, Mike Johnston wrote:
Mike, you need a better dictionary.
Definitions 8 & 9 are not positional. "OVER a hundred years " is fine.
See definition 3 for LESS.
Ah, yes, well, dictionaries have been going to hell ever since that
damned
liberal subvers
> Weapons of mass destruction.
now, this is a good one !!!
Language is like a river. It wears a bit here and there and changes its
course. What was correct yesterday may seem unwieldy tomorrow. Yet, I
must admit that some contemporary usage bothers me. Chief among these is
"I've got." I've got the answer. I've got to get another lens. When of
course al t
Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
LESS is an amount or volume word. FEWER is a number word.
Mike is correct. In English, "less" modifies a "mass noun" (like Jell-o);
"fewer" modifies a "count noun". A word is a count noun if it can be
preceded by "a" or "an".
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
sday, January 22, 2003 9:47 PM
Subject: Re: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor
> > Webster's Second
>
>
> I found this brief little web-soundbite about Webster's Second. It lays
out
> the story fairly well:
>
> http://www.inu.org/bieyi/cruises/webster.htm
>
> --Mike
>
>
>
PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 6:21 PM
Subject: Re: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor
> My favorite is "preventative" Where in hell did this word come from. I
> always thought the proper word was "preventive".
>
> Bill
>
> - Original M
> >that's [...]
> Add improper use of contractions to your list. Example: that's.
Gotta keep grist in the mill. Intentionally or not. :-)
TTYL, DougF KG4LMZ
"Gotta" ain't right neither .
Ed
_
Add photos to your e-mail with M
ry 22, 2003 5:51 PM
Subject: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor
> Also, I'm so sorry about this, but I'm about to ramp up into schoolmaster
> mode. I do this every now and then, and I *know* it's obnoxious. I'm fully
> aware that *most* of you are smarter and better educated t
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 11:30:01 +1000, jcoyle wrote:
> If I sat down and thought about it, I could probably go on all day!
To, too, and two.
Their, there, and they're.
Dangling prepositions.
Subject/verb agreement.
Improper pronoun choice (me instead of I, etc.).
Word misuse, a la Mike's rant.
In a message dated 1/22/2003 5:51:55 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> You may return to your regular programming...sorry again.
> (Most of the time,
> I'm really getting pretty good at holding my tongue.)
>
> --Mike
Good thing, since my grammar and sentence structure often
sat down and thought about it, I could probably go on all day!
John Coyle
Brisbane, Australia
- Original Message -
From: "Mike Johnston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 10:53 AM
Subject: Re: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor
>
Sorry. In Webster's Second College Edition (1970) OVER, prep: #11 -
during; through [over the past ten years].
BR
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I doubt very much that Webster's Second (of sainted memory) would approve of
"In business for over 25 years" (which phrase I happened to just read on the
B
> BTW: Shouldn't it have been "What the hell brought on THAT?"
>
> (Insert Winston Churchill quotation here.)
Mark,
You do know why American split infinities, don't you? It's because Fowler*
actually approved of the practice--he thought it was pedantic to disallow it
categorically. We promptly s
Ok, time for my mini-rant.
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, Mike Johnston wrote:
> You can have less water in a bucket, less brains in your head, and you could
> care less.
Why do people always use "I could care less" to indicate that they don't
care at all? If they could care less than they currently do,
> My pet peeve is people who use the phrase "begs the question" when
> they don't know what it means (they think it means "raises the
> question").
A couple of pet peeves:
"one of the only" (it's either "the only" or "one of the few")
"that" for "who," as in "the woman that was doing her nails
Yeah, Mike I know what you mean when you say that "Nodoby (sic) ever get
(sic) these things right..."
However, I recall someone posting once that we shouldn't correct other
folks' grammar and spelling on the list, since for many, English is not
their first language. You can't always be sure wheth
> Mike, you need a better dictionary.
>
> Definitions 8 & 9 are not positional. "OVER a hundred years " is fine.
> See definition 3 for LESS.
Ah, yes, well, dictionaries have been going to hell ever since that damned
liberal subversive Webster's Third came out. AHED is actually one of the
better
> Bob (similarly tooth-grated despite background as linguist, especially about
> split-infinitives, a particular habit of our transatlantic cousins)
Split is a bad way to have one's infinitives, all right. And while I may
split infinitives with Yankee abandon, at least we know the difference
betw
Hi,
Wednesday, January 22, 2003, 11:15:09 PM, you wrote:
> Dare I ask? What the hell brought THAT on?
probably:
>> simple, if two lenses are equally corrected, the one with less
>> elements will be better.
Bob (similarly tooth-grated despite background as linguist, especially about
split-infini
Dare I ask? What the hell brought THAT on?
Mike Johnston wrote:
>
> Also, I'm so sorry about this, but I'm about to ramp up into schoolmaster
> mode. I do this every now and then, and I *know* it's obnoxious. I'm fully
> aware that *most* of you are smarter and better educated than I am and just
Also, I'm so sorry about this, but I'm about to ramp up into schoolmaster
mode. I do this every now and then, and I *know* it's obnoxious. I'm fully
aware that *most* of you are smarter and better educated than I am and just
as capable and accomplished in your own fields as I am in mine. But the
th
94 matches
Mail list logo
