Peter wrote:
There appears to be a statistically significant correlation between
qualified meteorologists and poor spelling; at least by users of this
newsgroup
:-)



I expect to see typos in messaages to ngs, has such messages are like
doting down meassages on a notepad.

--
Joe Egginton
Wolverhampton
175m asl

Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Mar 28, 10:28 am, Bob Cox wrote:
In article ,

Natsman wrote:
I hardly think the preponderance (in E mails, newsgroups and the like)
of "definate"s and "there"s (instead of "their"s), etc. can be put
down to typos...
The recent "Winters on it's way" thread was rather wonderful ;-)

Totally OT for this ng but worth a look:

http://pippin.co.uk/images/appalling.jpg

This is still on display at a Tesco store at Bradley Stoke near here.

--
Bob Cox. Stoke Gifford, near Bristol, UK.

Is that your real name?

I've seen more humorous names than Bob Cox. One of my friends is called
Richard Gay. In my current employment I've come across a Roger Bent.
The best one though when I was working at the registry office putting
archives onto computer, there was a Herbert Cockhead!

--
Joe Egginton
Wolverhampton
175m asl

The one that really irritates me is "lightening" for "lightning".
Will (meteorologist and speller)

.... it used to annoy me, until I started reading some old texts where
the word was used all the time to describe the phenomenon. Then
looking it up in the "Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology", it has
this against 'lightning':

" discharge of electricity between groups of cloud .. Special use of
'lightening' (etc.)". Apparently has roots in Middle English.

Obviously in modern usage, it is a mis-spelling, but perhaps not quite
a 'hanging offence'!

Martin.

--
Martin Rowley
E:
W: booty.org.uk

Martin Rowley wrote:


The one that really irritates me is "lightening" for "lightning".
Will (meteorologist and speller)

... it used to annoy me, until I started reading some old texts where
the word was used all the time to describe the phenomenon. Then
looking it up in the "Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology", it has
this against 'lightning':

" discharge of electricity between groups of cloud .. Special use of
'lightening' (etc.)". Apparently has roots in Middle English.

Obviously in modern usage, it is a mis-spelling, but perhaps not
quite a 'hanging offence'!

Martin.

Totally OT but 3 that really irritate me a

1.
Use of "less" when it should be "fewer" and vice versa.

2.
Use of "underestimate" when it should be "overestimate" and vice versa
(a very common error made by TV and radio news reporters these days).

3.
Use of "would of" instead of "would've" (short for "would have").


I now anticipate wholesale criticism of the grammar in my postings :-)


Norman
--
Norman Lynagh
Chalfont St Giles, Buckinghamshire
85m a.s.l.
(remove "thisbit" twice to e-mail)

In article ,
Weatherlawyer wrote:

Is that your real name?

Yes it is. You should try getting one.

--
Bob Cox. Stoke Gifford, near Bristol, UK.

"Martin Rowley" wrote in message
...

The one that really irritates me is "lightening" for "lightning".
Will (meteorologist and speller)

... it used to annoy me, until I started reading some old texts where
the word was used all the time to describe the phenomenon. Then
looking it up in the "Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology", it has
this against 'lightning':

" discharge of electricity between groups of cloud .. Special use of
'lightening' (etc.)". Apparently has roots in Middle English.

Obviously in modern usage, it is a mis-spelling, but perhaps not quite
a 'hanging offence'!

Martin.



Well I never, thanks Martin.

Will
--

On Mar 28, 11:50*am, "Norman" normanthis...@thisbitweather-
consultancy.com wrote:
Martin Rowley wrote:

The one that really irritates me is "lightening" for "lightning".
Will (meteorologist and speller)

... it used to annoy me, until I started reading some old texts where
the word was used all the time to describe the phenomenon. Then
looking it up in the "Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology", it has
this against 'lightning':

" discharge of electricity between groups of cloud .. Special use of
'lightening' *(etc.)". Apparently has roots in Middle English.

Obviously in modern usage, it is a mis-spelling, but perhaps not
quite a 'hanging offence'!

Martin.

Totally OT but 3 that really irritate me a

1.
Use of "less" when it should be "fewer" and vice versa.

2.
Use of "underestimate" when it should be "overestimate" and vice versa
(a very common error made by TV and radio news reporters these days).

3.
Use of "would of" instead of "would've" (short for "would have").

I now anticipate wholesale criticism of the grammar in my postings :-)

Norman
--
Norman Lynagh
Chalfont St Giles, Buckinghamshire
85m a.s.l.
(remove "thisbit" twice to e-mail)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Does this mean that you will fortify yourself with a large
brandy when you next look at this newsgroup, to insulate yourself from
the effects of the abusive deluge because "anticipate" means to take
action in the expectation of something, eg taking an umbrella when
it's not actually raining but you think it will. It doesn't mean
merely "expect". I dunno, man of your calibre, as Hancock would have
said.

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey

Tudor Hughes wrote:

On Mar 28, 11:50*am, "Norman" normanthis...@thisbitweather-
consultancy.com wrote:
Martin Rowley wrote:

The one that really irritates me is "lightening" for
"lightning". Will (meteorologist and speller)

... it used to annoy me, until I started reading some old texts
where the word was used all the time to describe the phenomenon.
Then looking it up in the "Oxford Dictionary of English
Etymology", it has this against 'lightning':

" discharge of electricity between groups of cloud .. Special use
of 'lightening' *(etc.)". Apparently has roots in Middle English.

Obviously in modern usage, it is a mis-spelling, but perhaps not
quite a 'hanging offence'!

Martin.

Totally OT but 3 that really irritate me a

1.
Use of "less" when it should be "fewer" and vice versa.

2.
Use of "underestimate" when it should be "overestimate" and vice
versa (a very common error made by TV and radio news reporters
these days).

3.
Use of "would of" instead of "would've" (short for "would have").

I now anticipate wholesale criticism of the grammar in my postings
:-)

Norman
--
Norman Lynagh
Chalfont St Giles, Buckinghamshire
85m a.s.l.
(remove "thisbit" twice to e-mail)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Does this mean that you will fortify yourself with a large
brandy when you next look at this newsgroup, to insulate yourself from
the effects of the abusive deluge because "anticipate" means to take
action in the expectation of something, eg taking an umbrella when
it's not actually raining but you think it will. It doesn't mean
merely "expect". I dunno, man of your calibre, as Hancock would have
said.

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey


An Islay malt is more my style but I take you point, Tudor :-)


Norman
--
Norman Lynagh
Chalfont St Giles, Buckinghamshire
85m a.s.l.
(remove "thisbit" twice to e-mail)

On Mar 28, 10:28*am, Bob Cox wrote:
In article ,

Natsman wrote:
I hardly think the preponderance (in E mails, newsgroups and the like)
of "definate"s and "there"s (instead of "their"s), etc. can be put
down to typos...

The recent "Winters on it's way" thread was rather wonderful ;-)

Totally OT for this ng but worth a look:

http://pippin.co.uk/images/appalling.jpg

This is still on display at a Tesco store at Bradley Stoke near here.

--
Bob Cox. *Stoke Gifford, near Bristol, UK.

That is Truly Wonderful. My local Co-op is Fortnum and Mason
by comparison. Apart from the greengrocer's apostrophes there is that
fact that the notice should say "Women's", not "Woman's", and
furthermore what I want to know is where are the "Men's bras and
knickers"? It's actually a deliberate policy on the part of Tesco,
of course, to make the punters feel at home and not intimidate them
with elitism.

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey. (not as posh as you might think).

On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 08:01:03 -0700 (PDT), Tudor Hughes wrote:

It's actually a deliberate policy on the part of Tesco,
of course, to make the punters feel at home and not intimidate them
with elitism.

One thing in favour of Tesco - it keeps the poor people out of Sainsbury's
:-)
--
MCC