gam@amdahl.UUCP (G A Moffett) (01/30/86)
In response to my article objecting to force spell(1) to be applied to articles before they are posted, I received two letters, each pointing out errors in my original posting (which was run thru spell(1), by the way). The first pointed out my error in the use of 'pedantists': > to appease the pedantists who cannot tolerate seeing misspelled ^^^^^^^^^^ I was corrected that this should have been 'pedants'. I checked the dictionary and this is true; there is no 'pedantists', and 'pendants' is the word I wanted. The second pointed to the word 'thru': > PS -- I ran this article thru spell before posting it (I thought ^^^^ No excuse, that's how I spell; that's how I think it *should* be spelled. I hope that 'thru' will become the accepted spelling of 'through', but it is at least currently used in 'conversational' writing. (In formal writing I still use 'through'). By the way, both of the letter-writers agreed with me not to force spell onto article-posters. [ Since I wasn't sure where to direct the follow-ups to, I've garbaged the "Followup-To: " line in the header. I read net.nlang, too, so if you want to persue that angle.... ] -- Gordon A. Moffett ...!{ihnp4,cbosgd,seismo,hplabs}!amdahl!gam ~ And what is truth? ~ ~ Is truth unchanging law? ~ ~ We both have truths ~ ~ Are mine the same as yours? ~