Michael Everson scripsit:
> True. But lo! you have inadvertently misspelled it! It isn't fo'c'sle
> -- it's fo'c's'le! (New Oxford, 2001). It's pronounced ['fouksel].
What an absurd spelling. It's on all fours with Lewis Carroll's
idiosyncratic spellings "sha'n't", "wo'n't", and so on. "Fo'c'sle"
outnumbers "fo'c's'le" on the Web about three to one and the more
English-style spelling "foc'sle" two to one.
--
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
"Any legal document draws most of its meaning from context. A telegram
that says 'SELL HUNDRED THOUSAND SHARES IBM SHORT' (only 190 bits in
5-bit Baudot code plus appropriate headers) is as good a legal document
as any, even sans digital signature." --me
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Wed Aug 21 2002 - 08:22:21 EDT