To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / *9456 (-20)
  Re: Phrenetic Phonetics
 
(...) That's tres chic of you. 8^) Dave! FUT OT.Fun (24 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today
 
(...) Bad Spellers of the world UNTIE! Santosh ;-) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Grammar vs Logic (was: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
 
(...) Apology accepted! It's just that Ive heard the phrase used hundreds (maybe thousands) of times, mostly on the 'net, always by Americans... (...) The phrase is actually gramatically correct - it's the logic that's incorrect! (...) Doesn't (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today
 
Hey, Don't blame my country! I'll accept full blame for my gramatical mistake! :) The funny thing is that I'm usually the one correcting other people's grammar at work! Hmm - I guess I must have started using that phrase a long time ago and nobody (...) (24 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
 
(...) Wow, "More Vegemite, less Marmite"!!! You must be one of the militant ones.... Maggie (24 years ago, 9-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
 
  Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
 
(...) *sigh* Yeah, that's the thing about the English language, it is constantly evolving (some might say devolving!)-- otherwise I suppose we'd all go around talking like Chaucer's characters. The rate at which one accepts these changes is one of (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
 
(...) Hmmmm, well, my father-in-law - who has has multiple degrees in chemistry from Cal Tech and teaches chemistry - spells it aluminum. Nyahh, nyahh, nyahh! :-P And since you note both are listed, it kinda reduces you first comment's (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
 
  Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today
 
(...) Ooops missed the footnote. [1] Strine: Strine for Australian (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
 
(...) I've been told by those not brought up on Vegemite that it's basically inedible. Pity, I've been eating it since before I could walk! You'll see my favourite concentrated yeast extract even gets a mention on my profile page (URL) to the (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
 
  Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today
 
(...) Never let it be said that a Strine[1] was adverse to a little "linguistic laziness", but in this case, it actually changes the entire meaning of the sentence. Most people know what is actually meant, but it just doesn't make sense to me, when (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
 
(...) Don't you mean "spelled" ? ;^) ~Grand Admiral Muffin Head (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
 
  Re: Phrenetic Phonetics
 
(...) Wow, another person who pronounces it wrong. :^P I can't find anything in the dictionary that's spelled "Technic" and pronounced (tek-neek) ~Grand Admiral Muffin Head (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
 
(...) Except on most periodic tables, you'll see it spelt "Aluminium". Most dictionaries list one as a variant of the other. ROSCO (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
 
  Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
 
(...) How else would you pronounce aluminum? Can't be five syllables with only four vowels. ;-) Bruce (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
 
  Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today
 
(...) I tend to think here in the "colonies" we have naturally evolved the language, and thankfully so. I cannot imagine eating "Bangers and Mash" or "Spotted Dick", or even worse smoking a "fag". I will take a little linguistic laziness anyday. (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: NOT the Queen's English (was re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
 
Is that metal Aloomenum (which I'm sure Americans are keeping secret from the rest of the world) actually useful for anything? Santosh (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
 
  Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today
 
(...) How do you mispronounce Futuron? I assume it is to be correctly pronounced as future-on, but am I wrong in this? And while I've never heard it pronounced Duh-plo I always liked the correct pronounciation of Lego since then those old (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Phrenetic Phonetics
 
(...) 8^) Not me. My first exposure to "Technic" was in the form of "Technics," pronounced "teck-neeks" by a salesperson at a stereo store. Dave! (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today
 
(...) For that matter, has there ever been an official pronunciation proclamation by LEGO to prove that their product is pronounced (leh-goh) as opposed to (lee-goh) or even (lay-goh) ? I follow the course of logic that: Technical = (tek-nik-al) and (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today
 
(...) I'm not so sure about this. In an episode of the George Reeves Superman series, the mad doctor of the week had developed a cold ray that projected a beam of cold 2000 degrees below zero. If this is true, then obviously "absolute zero" is no (...) (24 years ago, 8-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR