The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 10.1797 Saturday, 23 October 1999.
[1] From: Larry Weiss <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Thursday, 21 Oct 1999 13:33:13 -0400
Subj: Re: SHK 10.1788 Re: Old Bill
[2] From: Mike Jensen <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Thursday, 21 Oct 1999 10:36:44 -0700
Subj: Old Bill
[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Larry Weiss <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Thursday, 21 Oct 1999 13:33:13 -0400
Subject: 10.1788 Re: Old Bill
Comment: Re: SHK 10.1788 Re: Old Bill
In commenting on a post by T. Hawkes, Mike Jensen remarked:
>As someone prone to typos, transpositions, and the occasional real
>spelling error, ... I do want to mention that the spelling above
>in not mine.
Point taken.
BTW, isn't "civilised" a preferred spelling in Britain?
[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mike Jensen <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Thursday, 21 Oct 1999 10:36:44 -0700
Subject: Old Bill
I want to clean up a mess I made. It was pointed out to me that in
England _civilized_ has a legitimate alternate spelling with the _s_
replacing the _z_.
In my response to Terry Hawkes message, I quoted his post including the
word _civilised_. I hadn't noticed Terry's spelling until my spell
checker caught it. I then wrote a note expressing my own trouble with
typos, and said the spelling of _civilised_ was not mine.
In light of that off list response, I want to apologize to Mr. Hawkes.
Though my intention really wasn't to chide him for spelling, it may have
had that result. The mistake was mine, not his.
I did intend to chide him for his implication about the New Globe
Theater, however. Those comments stand.
Mike Jensen
|