Re: Evolving language or laziness?

Subject: Re: Evolving language or laziness?
From: Tim Altom <taltom -at- IQUEST -dot- NET>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1996 07:48:00 EST

>Tim Alton pulled her head out of her butt long enough to write:

>> > Sorry, Colleen, but I'm always suspicious of a proposed change to a
>> > language's basic structure that's endured since at least the days of
William
>> > the Conquerer and quite probably as far back as the birth of Christ.

>Exqueeze me? Hellooooo? Is there anybody in there!? Let me guess.. her
>favorite quote is

> "If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it's good enough for me."
> (attributed to David Edwards, Ma Ferguson, and others)

>She simply cannot be referring to English. Nothing of note has remained the
>same in the structure of English over the last 1000 years.. and it didn't
>exist 2000 years ago.. perhaps she's heard of Old English

Perhaps list members have read the rest of the flame I've deleted here. I
trust this posting was from some aberrant personality, because I've never
before encountered such viciousness from any colleague here. High
disagreement, perhaps, but this went far beyond picking my points apart.

I usually try to respond to people who have responded to me. This time, I'm
afraid I'm just going to highlight the absurdity of the post's tone and move on.

Tim Altom
Vice President
Simply Written, Inc.
317.899.5882 (voice)
317.899.5987 (fax)
http://www.iquest.net/simply/simplywritten


Previous by Author: Re: Evolving language or laziness?
Next by Author: Re: Evolving language or laziness?
Previous by Thread: Re: Evolving language or laziness?
Next by Thread: Re: Evolving language or laziness?


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads