Found this on an educational ng:
Ensgilh 101=20
=20
Acocdrnig to an elgnsih unviesitry sutdy the oredr of letetrs in a wrod =
dosen't
mttaer, the olny thnig thta's iopmrantt is that the frsit and lsat =
Ltteer of
eevry word is in the crcreot ptoision. The rset can be jmbueld and one =
is stlil
able to raed the txet wiohtut dclftfuiiy.



--=20
katysails
s/v Chanteuse
Kirie Elite 32
http://katysails.tripod.com

"Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax
and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein

Ha ha ha Ha Ha Ha..... Good one... !!!!!

CM

"katysails" wrote in message
...
Found this on an educational ng:
Ensgilh 101

Acocdrnig to an elgnsih unviesitry sutdy the oredr of letetrs in a wrod
dosen't
mttaer, the olny thnig thta's iopmrantt is that the frsit and lsat Ltteer of
eevry word is in the crcreot ptoision. The rset can be jmbueld and one is
stlil
able to raed the txet wiohtut dclftfuiiy.



--
katysails
s/v Chanteuse
Kirie Elite 32
http://katysails.tripod.com

"Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax
and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein

Katy,
If you get the chance, check out a video called "A Light History of
the English Language" with Professor Elliot Engel. He and other
linguists predict that within 100 years we will be grunting whole
sentences in a language called Slurvian. In fact he gives examples of
such slurred sentences already in use ("jeet" = did you eat?)
Maybe Bertie is on to something.

Scout
" The best thing to do with a stupid remark is to not hear it."
R. Heinlein


"katysails" wrote:

Found this on an educational ng:
Ensgilh 101

Acocdrnig to an elgnsih unviesitry sutdy the oredr of letetrs in a wrod dosen't
mttaer, the olny thnig thta's iopmrantt is that the frsit and lsat Ltteer of
eevry word is in the crcreot ptoision. The rset can be jmbueld and one is stlil
able to raed the txet wiohtut dclftfuiiy.

Slurvian.=20

I cna see that happening in some areas already....so they;re making a =
case that we've reached the language pinnacle and now we're going to =
regress....I have a hard enough time understanding ebonics (the aides =
use it to talk to each other but change to normal English if they =
include someone who doesn't understand....)

--=20
katysails
s/v Chanteuse
Kirie Elite 32
http://katysails.tripod.com

"Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax
and get used to the idea." - Robert A. Heinlein

"katysails" reported:
Found this on an educational ng:
Ensgilh 101

Acocdrnig to an elgnsih unviesitry sutdy the oredr of letetrs in a wrod
dosen't
mttaer, the olny thnig thta's iopmrantt is that the frsit and lsat
Ltteer of
eevry word is in the crcreot ptoision. The rset can be jmbueld and one
is stlil
able to raed the txet wiohtut dclftfuiiy.

This is actually a very sophisticated zinger directed at the
(soi-disant "Christian") phonics-only proponents.

For some reason, fundamentalists in the post-WWII era decided that
"whole-language" was synonymous with "secular humanism" and therefore
phonics-only *must* be the only possible God-approved method of
learning to read. Of course, they were unfortunately ignoring the fact
that phonics-only had been tried in the public schools in this country
from the late 1800s through the early part of the 1900s and was
universally rejected after producing a generation of "readers" who
could sound out (most) words, one at a time, but had no comprehension
or retention of what they'd just "read". This is why so many people in
the "education establishment" at the time were opposed to
phonics-only. It had already been tried and found wanting.

Refusing to learn from history, the fundies girded their loins and
engaged in a no-holds-barred battle through the fifties and sixties to
force school districts to adopt phonics-only and reject the
Satan-inspired whole-language methodology. By the time we got to Chall
(et al), the battle lines were so rigidly drawn that genuine
researchers, like Chall, were demonized by everyone. Eventually, IMO,
the fundies just kinda got tired of fighting in the face of
then-current research plus historical evidence.

Since then, the battle cry has changed from "phonics only!" to
"phonics is most important!" You rarely hear about the trench-warfare
kind of pitched battles there used to be back in the heyday of
phonics-only.

Now back to your regularly scheduled troll wars and flamefests...

Sailing-related content: An old college buddy of mine e-mailed me from
Mystic. He's taking sailing lessons there and is interested in buying
a sailing dink or small trailer-sailer. Anybody got any
recommendations?

Frank

"Frank and Ronnie Maier" wrote in message
Sailing-related content: An old college buddy of mine e-mailed me from
Mystic. He's taking sailing lessons there and is interested in buying
a sailing dink or small trailer-sailer. Anybody got any
recommendations?

This is an incredibly difficult question to answer, but in the true spirit
of asa, I shall not let ignorance get in the way of an opinion.

A topper Sport16 might fit the bill. It can carry 4 adults(just), and it
can be easily trailed. It is a perfect beginner's dinghy, that can fly an
assymetric.

However, if your friend is going to advance to competetive racing quickly,
then maybe the Sport16 isn't the boat for him.


I think that we need more information to give a good answer!



Regards


Donal
--

"Donal" wrote:
"Frank and Ronnie Maier" wrote in message
Sailing-related content: An old college buddy of mine e-mailed me from
Mystic. He's taking sailing lessons there and is interested in buying
a sailing dink or small trailer-sailer. Anybody got any
recommendations?

This is an incredibly difficult question to answer, but in the true spirit
of asa, I shall not let ignorance get in the way of an opinion.
A topper Sport16 might fit the bill. It can carry 4 adults(just), and it
can be easily trailed. It is a perfect beginner's dinghy, that can fly an
assymetric.
However, if your friend is going to advance to competetive racing quickly,
then maybe the Sport16 isn't the boat for him.
I think that we need more information to give a good answer!

Thanks. I know it was a terribly generic question; but I had to ask
'cause the last trailerable I sailed was a Rebel 16 many (many!) years
ago. He's a (late) middle-aged research biochemist who's never been
very athletic. I think the last time he sailed before this present
interest was with me back in the mid-60's. I doubt he's gonna get
interested in racing. I suspect he'll mostly sail solo. He says he
wants speed and power but it's Mystic, not the Caribbean, so he's not
interested in a wet boat, like a cat. I think his most significant
parameter is that it hasta be easy to launch, load, setup, and
takedown single-handed.

Thanks for the Sport16 suggestion; I'll pass it along.

Frank

Frank and Ronnie Maier wrote:

snip He's a (late) middle-aged research biochemist who's never been
very athletic. I think the last time he sailed before this present
interest was with me back in the mid-60's. I doubt he's gonna get
interested in racing. I suspect he'll mostly sail solo. He says he
wants speed and power but it's Mystic, not the Caribbean, so he's not
interested in a wet boat, like a cat. I think his most significant
parameter is that it hasta be easy to launch, load, setup, and
takedown single-handed.


All these presumed limitations and wish-lists , especially the
last sentence, all point to non-conventional craft--drop-in
masts, simple rigging, robustness, kindness on crew, traditional
rather than modern rigs and so on. However, my joy in pursuing
lost causes has been reduced somewhat over the last few years.
Refer him to http://www.ace.net.au/schooner/sites2.htm or Craig
O'Donnell's Cheap Pages (do a Google) for further explanations if
he really wants the last sentence. Otherwise he can condemn
himself to the hours of fiddling that go with any racing-rigged
sailing dinghy or tralier sailer.

--
Flying Tadpole

-------------------------
Learn what lies below the waves of cyberspace!
http://www.internetopera.netfirms.com