RE: Phonology [was: interesting SIL-document]

From: Arcane Jill ([email protected])
Date: Thu Feb 05 2004 - 05:39:41 EST

Next message: John Cowan: "Re: Phonology [was: interesting SIL-document]"

Previous message: Doug Ewell: "Re: Panther PUA behavior"
Maybe in reply to: Mike Ayers: "RE: Phonology [was: interesting SIL-document]"
Next in thread: John Cowan: "Re: Phonology [was: interesting SIL-document]"
Reply: John Cowan: "Re: Phonology [was: interesting SIL-document]"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

    -----Original Message-----
    *From:* Hohberger, Clive [mailto:[email protected]]
    *Sent:* Wednesday, February 04, 2004 11:08 PM
    *To:* Mike Ayers; 'John Burger'; [email protected]
    *Subject:* RE: Phonology [was: interesting SIL-document]

        Mike,
        Actually "be-f***king-hind" is a British grammatical construct,
        known as the "infix profane".

        Speaking as one knowledgable in American idioms,
            there is no-f***ing-way an American would have conceived of
        the f***ing infix construct...

Delenn said "abso-fragging-lutely dammit" on Babylon 5 once. Wasn't that
American?
Jill

Next message: John Cowan: "Re: Phonology [was: interesting SIL-document]"
Previous message: Doug Ewell: "Re: Panther PUA behavior"
Maybe in reply to: Mike Ayers: "RE: Phonology [was: interesting SIL-document]"
Next in thread: John Cowan: "Re: Phonology [was: interesting SIL-document]"
Reply: John Cowan: "Re: Phonology [was: interesting SIL-document]"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Feb 05 2004 - 06:37:44 EST