CCBC-Net Archives
[CCBC-Net] O.T.: Spelling
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: SIwanter at aol.com <SIwanter>
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 13:11:02 EST
I believe that this single word controversy would have been completely mitigated had the dog been carrying in his mouth a book on evolution when bitten on the scrotum. The subliminal message would have been loud and clear though still abstruse to the young listening audience. In attempting to make personal amends for his part in the Fall of Man, the Snake?s one lunge would have signified current righteous attacks on immigration, modern science, free speech, habeas corpus (isn't that also a male body part never mentioned in mixed company?) and the Eastern elite. Such an explanation would no doubt have quieted all rampaging Savonarolas as well as bring further luster to the joys of doublespeak. Both the author and publisher should be taken to task for this egregious lapse of judgment. Now what is the next talking points faux outrage on the agenda?
In a message dated 2/18/2007 9:57:11 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, Druthgo at sonic.net writes:
How absolutely lovely that the NYT BR of "Lucky" weighed in with about three sentences. However, the NYT front page item about certain objections to a SINGLE word--many paragraphs.
"Oh, what fools [some librarians] be."
I hope that in those regions where people swoon at a word there is public library where a young person can borrow a book.
To avoid using a real word, is it "o.k." to spell it incorrectly?
Big Grandma
_______________________________________________ CCBC-Net mailing list CCBC-Net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe... http://ccbc.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
Received on Sun 18 Feb 2007 12:11:02 PM CST
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 13:11:02 EST
I believe that this single word controversy would have been completely mitigated had the dog been carrying in his mouth a book on evolution when bitten on the scrotum. The subliminal message would have been loud and clear though still abstruse to the young listening audience. In attempting to make personal amends for his part in the Fall of Man, the Snake?s one lunge would have signified current righteous attacks on immigration, modern science, free speech, habeas corpus (isn't that also a male body part never mentioned in mixed company?) and the Eastern elite. Such an explanation would no doubt have quieted all rampaging Savonarolas as well as bring further luster to the joys of doublespeak. Both the author and publisher should be taken to task for this egregious lapse of judgment. Now what is the next talking points faux outrage on the agenda?
In a message dated 2/18/2007 9:57:11 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, Druthgo at sonic.net writes:
How absolutely lovely that the NYT BR of "Lucky" weighed in with about three sentences. However, the NYT front page item about certain objections to a SINGLE word--many paragraphs.
"Oh, what fools [some librarians] be."
I hope that in those regions where people swoon at a word there is public library where a young person can borrow a book.
To avoid using a real word, is it "o.k." to spell it incorrectly?
Big Grandma
_______________________________________________ CCBC-Net mailing list CCBC-Net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe... http://ccbc.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
Received on Sun 18 Feb 2007 12:11:02 PM CST
