I don't associate with the trailor trash and so didn't know some of their
speech patterns have made it into the mass market paperback trade. Vortices is
the spelling among those who have studied it in a formal fashion.

I take it you written a "Definitive Book" on the subject?

Bwahahahahahahahahaaaa


CM

"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
| I don't associate with the trailer trash and so didn't know some of their
| speech patterns have made it into the mass market paperback trade.
Vortices is
| the spelling among those who have studied it in a formal fashion.
|
|

But how do these incorrect spellings get promulgated? Could it be by
'trailer trash' of the literate world? Or would you promote ebonics as a
viable form of communication? Even more shocking is that many (most?) of
the posters here don't seem to know the differences among They're, Their
and There.

Cheers


OzOn wrote:

On 28 Jan 2004 22:43:49 GMT, (JAXAshby) scribbled
thusly:


I don't associate with the trailor trash and so didn't know some of their
speech patterns have made it into the mass market paperback trade. Vortices is
the spelling among those who have studied it in a formal fashion.



Vagaries of the language Jocks..
You know, jail as opposed to gaol,
slip instead of berth or pen.
s instead of z

You need to get out more..pull your head out of Popular Mechanics and
read.


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

"MC" wrote in message
...
But how do these incorrect spellings get promulgated? Could it be by
'trailer trash' of the literate world? Or would you promote ebonics as a
viable form of communication? Even more shocking is that many (most?) of
the posters here don't seem to know the differences among They're, Their
and There.

....and yet, in the Usenet community, it is considered "bad form" to
critisize poor spelling.
There is a very good reason for this. If you need to abuse your opponent's
use of language, then you are probably incapable of abusing his logic.
Therefore, once you resort to grammatical, or spelling flames, - you have
lost the arguement.




Regards


Donal
--

uh...you spelled argument wrong.

"Lanod" argued

...
Therefore, once you resort to grammatical, or spelling flames, - you have
lost the arguement.

ah.......you misspelled criticize.

"Donald" wrote ...


...and yet, in the Usenet community, it is considered "bad form" to
critisize poor spelling.

Therefore, you have lost this argument!

Regards

Donal
--


"Scott Vernon" wrote in message
...
uh...you spelled argument wrong.

"Lanod" argued

...
Therefore, once you resort to grammatical, or spelling flames, - you
have
lost the arguement.

"Scott Vernon" wrote in message
...
ah.......you misspelled criticize.

True - it should be "criticise"!!!

Regards

Donal
--

"Donal" wrote in message
...

"Scott Vernon" wrote in message
...
ah.......you misspelled criticize.

True - it should be "criticise"!!!

Regards

Donal
--

You're right, loser. I WIN.

Main Entry: crit·i·cise
British variant of CRITICIZE

SV



"Donal" wrote in message
...

"Scott Vernon" wrote in message
...
ah.......you misspelled criticize.

True - it should be "criticise"!!!

Regards

Donal
--