Re: Semantic(s)

Subject: Re: Semantic(s)
From: jennysubs -at- mac -dot- com
To: techwr-l List <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 11:19:06 -0700

I got "for all intents and purposes" and "coming down the pike".

I had to look up champing at the bit, but it's been used as chomping so long that chomping seems correct.

On Mar 17, 2010, at 11:14 AM, Ken Poshedly wrote:

> The nonexistent "irregardless" jumped right out at me, as did "tow the line" ----> ""toe the line".
> -- Kenpo in Atlanta
> ________________________________
> From: Bill Swallow <techcommdood -at- gmail -dot- com>
> To: Janet Swisher <jmswisher -at- gmail -dot- com>
> Cc: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> Sent: Wed, March 17, 2010 2:04:47 PM
> Subject: Re: Semantic(s)
> Irregardless, for all intensive purposes, it's a moot point. These
> mistakes will always be coming down the pipe and will keep us chomping
> at the bit to tow the line. ;-)
> (Go ahead, count 'em!)
> Yes, improper use drives me nutty. Not that I'm not there already.


Use Doc-To-Help's XML-based editor, Microsoft Word, or HTML and
produce desktop, Web, or print deliverables. Just write (or import)
and Doc-To-Help does the rest. Free trial:

Explore CAREER options and paths related to Technical Writing,
learn to create SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS documents, and
get tips on FUNCTIONAL SPECIFICATION best practices. Free at:

You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit

To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Please move off-topic discussions to the Chat list, at:


Semantic(s): From: Janet Swisher
Re: Semantic(s): From: Bill Swallow
Re: Semantic(s): From: Ken Poshedly

Previous by Author: Re: How do hiring companies view TW resumes?
Next by Author: Re: Senior vs. principal writer
Previous by Thread: Re: Semantic(s)
Next by Thread: RE: Semantic(s)

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads