 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsCat AnecdotesHealth and BehaviorRescue CatKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Cat Forum / Health and Behavior / March 2004Cat Protector at it again
Hey everyone In case you're not subscribed to rec.pets.cats.rescue, there's a thread entitled "Please help the mystery cat", which was posted by an incredibly kind person who took in an injured cat, and paid their own money for his care. They've gotten to the end of their resources, and are trying to find someone to take over care. Cat Protector has gotten into the thread with such nuggets as the following: >If he is such a special cat to you then why suggest he be an outdoor cat? >Also, if you are so broke and can't care for him then how come you have >money for Internet access? Just a heads up, as this poor person seems to have no clue of CP's moronic history. eq Feb 2004: > Cat Protector has gotten into the thread with such nuggets as the > following: Ignore him. Those who engage in conversation with him there soon learn he is not very bright.  SignatureCheryl Trapped like rats. In a chia-pet. MIB II >Feb 2004: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Ignore him. Those who engage in conversation with him there soon learn he >is not very bright. I suppose you're right. It's just that sometimes his stupidity borders on the obscene. eq > Ignore him. Those who engage in conversation with him there soon learn he > is not very bright. I'm starting to wonder if CP doesn't have some kind of psychological syndrome. OK, I didn't just start wondering that, but in the past it was sort of a sarcastic wondering (like, "Man that guy's an idiot. He's not all there!"-wondering). Now I really do think he has some kind of problem--like asperger's syndrome or something like that. How is it possible that he not see his own hypocrisy when it is pointed out to him time and again? Even I know when I'm being a hypocrital dumbass! OT: Whenever I read about Shadow going for a shave and squeeze, I can't help but think of that Play-doh Barbershop commercial! Shave and an anal gland squeeze...(sung to the tune of "Shave and a haircut!) rona Signature***For e-mail, replace .com with .ca Sorry for the inconvenience!*** 19 Feb 2004: > OT: Whenever I read about Shadow going for a shave and squeeze, I can't > help but think of that Play-doh Barbershop commercial! Shave and an anal > gland squeeze...(sung to the tune of "Shave and a haircut!) two bits. lol When I had him in there I told them I was going to ask for it like that and they laughed. Actually his vet said he doesn't protest when she cleans him up and it made me feel bad that I can't do it on my own. But anything down "there" makes him bite *me* so let those who don't stress him do it. Wish us luck! He's been on the EOD prednisone for longer than he has ever been and still doing well. His appetite is lower on the "off" day but he isn't nauseous so maybe he'll lose some weight if this works out. I've gone to 2x per day Flagyl since the lowering of Pred (2.5mg ea dose) and that is more of a "treatment" dose rather than maintenance, but some have luck with it. It never worked before but I didn't try to cut the pred to EOD for long, either. If I can get the other cats to leave him alone we might make progress. I even heard him in the litter box this morning early when he would usually be farting and squirting and he only pee'd. Progress? Maybe. First sign of nausea and he will go back to daily 5mg. He has a history of going downhill very fast. SignatureCheryl Trapped like rats. In a chia-pet. MIB II > I've > gone to 2x per day Flagyl since the lowering of Pred (2.5mg ea dose) This was very wrong info. The flagyl is 250mg per pill and maintenance is 1/2 pill per day. I've up'd it back to "treatment" dose of the whole pill 2x per day. oi. SignatureCheryl Trapped like rats. In a chia-pet. MIB II circa Thu, 19 Feb 2004 19:11:33 -0600, in rec.pets.cats.health+behav, Cheryl (jlhshadow@NOSPAMhotmail.com) said, > Wish us luck! He's been on the EOD prednisone for longer than he has ever > been and still doing well. His appetite is lower on the "off" day but he [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > of nausea and he will go back to daily 5mg. He has a history of going > downhill very fast. <fingers crossed> Laura SignatureI am Dyslexia of Borg, Your a.s will be laminated. > If I can get the other cats to leave him alone we might make progress. I > even heard him in the litter box this morning early when he would usually > be farting and squirting and he only pee'd. Progress? Maybe. First sign > of nausea and he will go back to daily 5mg. He has a history of going > downhill very fast. I'm hoping for the best! I hope you'll keep us updated. And you tell Bonnie and Shamrock that if they touch him, I'm going to sic/sick/sik (how do you spell that?) my Kitty on them! She won't let them bully Shadow (she ruled the roost at her kitty vacation home--in a nice way, of course--no fighting for her! And she even had the big dog wrapped around her little paws!). rona Signature***For e-mail, replace .com with .ca Sorry for the inconvenience!*** circa Thu, 19 Feb 2004 21:33:11 -0600, in rec.pets.cats.health+behav, Rona Yuthasastrakosol (prasantrin@yahoo.com) said, > sic/sick/sik (how > do you spell that?) sic. :-) Laura SignatureI am Dyslexia of Borg, Your a.s will be laminated. > sic. :-) > > Laura Ah! I always associate 'sic' with quotations that have misspellings. 'Sic' is a bit of a strange word, isn't it? I looked it up in the dictionary and the past tense is "sicced." Does that look weird or what? Kind of like 'their.' Sometimes, when I'm writing, I have to stop and stare at 'their' because I'll think I've spelled it incorrectly. rona (I'm on a roll for OT posts this week!) Signature***For e-mail, replace .com with .ca Sorry for the inconvenience!*** > > sic. :-) > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > is a bit of a strange word, isn't it? I looked it up in the dictionary and > the past tense is "sicced." Does that look weird or what? Yep, it does. ;-) Kind of like > 'their.' Sometimes, when I'm writing, I have to stop and stare at 'their' > because I'll think I've spelled it incorrectly. Hint for spelling "their": it starts w/ "the", just as "there" does. (I have to have little tricks like this, since I teach gr. 3; but they work for adults, too. <g>) Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon >From: "Cathy Friedmann" clfr@adelphia.net >Hint for spelling "their": it starts w/ "the", just as "there" does. (I >have to have little tricks like this, since I teach gr. 3; but they work for >adults, too. <g>) Good hint, Cathy. I'll have to remember this one :) Lauren ________ See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm > >From: "Cathy Friedmann" clfr@adelphia.net > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Good hint, Cathy. I'll have to remember this one :) Want another one? ;-) "Does" & "doesn't" - kids typically write "dose" & "dosen't". So... start with "doe, a deer, a female deer." (Okay, one *really* is starting with the root word "do", but it doesn't fit the trick!) So you have one doe; now make it plural: imagine seeing some does in a meadow. Then deal w/ the "n't" bit if you need the contraction "doesn't". Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon > So... start with "doe, a deer, a female deer." (Okay, one *really* is > starting with the root word "do", but it doesn't fit the trick!) So you > have one doe; now make it plural: imagine seeing some does in a meadow. > Then deal w/ the "n't" bit if you need the contraction "doesn't". Do you have one for people who use 's to indicate plurality? It annoys me to no end, but is very, very common. Also a lot of people write 'loose' instead of 'lose' and 'advise' instead of 'advice'. Those are three of my biggest pet spelling peeves (and 'alot' instead of 'a lot', but I've almost come to terms with that one). rona Signature***For e-mail, replace .com with .ca Sorry for the inconvenience!*** circa Sat, 21 Feb 2004 08:16:39 -0600, in rec.pets.cats.health+behav, Rona Yuthasastrakosol (prasantrin@yahoo.com) said, > Do you have one for people who use 's to indicate plurality? It annoys me > to no end, but is very, very common. Also a lot of people write 'loose' > instead of 'lose' and 'advise' instead of 'advice'. Those are three of my > biggest pet spelling peeves (and 'alot' instead of 'a lot', but I've almost > come to terms with that one). Don't forget "your" to indicate "you are". That one sets my teeth on edge. Actually, so do all the ones you listed, plus a dozen or two others, but that's beside the point. ;-) Laura SignatureI am Dyslexia of Borg, Your a.s will be laminated. > Don't forget "your" to indicate "you are". That one sets my teeth on > edge. Actually, so do all the ones you listed, plus a dozen or two > others, but that's beside the point. ;-) I saw this in a newspaper a few days ago, along with "wives" as a possessive (should have been "wife's"). By someone paid to write. Sheesh. Signaturehttp://www.mindspring.com/~slywy/ http://slywy.diaryland.com/ circa Sat, 21 Feb 2004 16:22:20 GMT, in rec.pets.cats.health+behav, Diane L. Schirf (delenn@mindspring-getridofthistoreply-.com) said, > > Don't forget "your" to indicate "you are". That one sets my teeth on > > edge. Actually, so do all the ones you listed, plus a dozen or two > > others, but that's beside the point. ;-) > > I saw this in a newspaper a few days ago, along with "wives" as a > possessive (should have been "wife's"). By someone paid to write. Sheesh. Heh. I once posted on a local news station's message board asking if they had any writers who had a grasp of the English language (you would not believe the egregious errors in both the written and broadcast stories put out by this station). Appallingly, huge numbers of people jumped in to offer _support_ of the station's misuse of the English language. Not one single person agreed that a news agency should hire writers capable of properly using the language in which they write. This is one of the many reasons I don't have children. The ignorami population is simply too dense (numerically speaking). Why are people expected to suffer fools gladly? Because there are so damned many of 'em that there would be nobody left to talk to otherwise. Laura SignatureI am Dyslexia of Borg, Your a.s will be laminated. > Don't forget "your" to indicate "you are". That one sets my teeth on > edge. Actually, so do all the ones you listed, plus a dozen or two > others, but that's beside the point. ;-) I must admit, I did not include that one because I've noticed that I have a tendency to use one for the other when I type quickly =:-o!. I don't do it when writing long-hand, though, so the confusion must have something to do with speed and time for reflection. Does 'loan' as a verb annoy you? I know it has pretty much become an accepted form (I've seen it in more than one dictionary as a verb), but I still hate it. Most people in my age group use it frequently, though, and I suspect within the next one or two generations it will become the norm over 'lend'. Eek! rona (just about 5 hours left before I have to stop myself from all these OT posts! But they're so much fun!) rona Signature***For e-mail, replace .com with .ca Sorry for the inconvenience!*** circa Sat, 21 Feb 2004 19:08:50 -0600, in rec.pets.cats.health+behav, Rona Yuthasastrakosol (prasantrin@yahoo.com) said, > > Don't forget "your" to indicate "you are". That one sets my teeth on > > edge. Actually, so do all the ones you listed, plus a dozen or two [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > when writing long-hand, though, so the confusion must have something to do > with speed and time for reflection. I caught myself typing it once and nearly hit myself in the head since I have such a pet peeve about it. :-) > Does 'loan' as a verb annoy you? I know it has pretty much become an > accepted form (I've seen it in more than one dictionary as a verb), but I > still hate it. Most people in my age group use it frequently, though, and I > suspect within the next one or two generations it will become the norm over > 'lend'. Eek! I don't like "loan" as a verb; that's what "lend" means. With that said, it has crept so much into colloquial English that not only do I pretty well ignore it now, but I probably even use it myself occasionally. Ick. I hope I don't. > rona (just about 5 hours left before I have to stop myself from all these OT > posts! But they're so much fun!) Aren't they, though? :-) Laura SignatureI am Dyslexia of Borg, Your a.s will be laminated. > circa Sat, 21 Feb 2004 19:08:50 -0600, in rec.pets.cats.health+behav, > Rona Yuthasastrakosol (prasantrin@yahoo.com) said, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > when writing long-hand, though, so the confusion must have something to do > > with speed and time for reflection. "Its" & "it's" being another pair. Many people seem to have no idea which is which - & I find, when typing, that I may accidentally use "it's" when I really wanted "its". > > rona (just about 5 hours left before I have to stop myself from all these OT > > posts! But they're so much fun!) > > Aren't they, though? :-) They often are, I agree. One of my other ngs often experiences serious bouts of thread drift, but most of us on the group love it. It also contributes to ng cohesion, I think. IOW - a sense of community builds up. Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon circa Sun, 22 Feb 2004 11:07:38 -0500, in rec.pets.cats.health+behav, Cathy Friedmann (clfr@adelphia.net) said, > > > with speed and time for reflection. > > "Its" & "it's" being another pair. Many people seem to have no idea which > is which - & I find, when typing, that I may accidentally use "it's" when I > really wanted "its". Weird; I tend to do the reverse- type "its" when I wanted to type "it's". > > > rona (just about 5 hours left before I have to stop myself from all > these OT [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > bouts of thread drift, but most of us on the group love it. It also > contributes to ng cohesion, I think. IOW - a sense of community builds up. Absolutely agreed. I have no problem with thread drift; if I don't want to read it, I can simply move on to the next thread. However, it's usually from drift that you glean real insights into the personalities of other people in newsgroups. AFAIC, that's a good thing. :-) Laura SignatureI am Dyslexia of Borg, Your a.s will be laminated. "Rona Yuthasastrakosol" <prasantrin@yahoo.com> wrote in message > I must admit, I did not include that one because I've noticed that I have a > tendency to use one for the other when I type quickly =:-o!. I don't do it > when writing long-hand, though, so the confusion must have something to do > with speed and time for reflection. > rona I do that often too when I´m typing and I only see it if I proofread, and I usually don´t. My excuse is that my fingers have a will of their own. ;) I took typing in high school and we used to have to practice syllables over and over again, we had contests to see how many words we could type per minute. Our teacher would also read a text for us at the end of every class and we really had to type fast, so I guess my fingers often "go with the sound," instead of actually going with the word. Liz <c864320@yahoo.com> wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav: > "Rona Yuthasastrakosol" <prasantrin@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> I must admit, I did not include that one because I've noticed [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > had to type fast, so I guess my fingers often "go with the sound," > instead of actually going with the word. There was a popular email that went around last year that had words scrambled but you could read it just fine because the first and last letter was correct. I subscribe to Discover Magazine and they got curious as tou why that is. The explanation that follows is very believable AND explains why we can't proofread our stuff for crap. If we got it close to correct we don't see the error. They wrote: Srcambled! When you raed a sencente, the oerdr of the ltetres in a word dsnoe't mteatr as long as the fsirt and last ones are in the rhgit pcale. Last fall, a widely circulated e-mail written in a similar garbled fashion reached Denis Pelli, a professor of psychology at New York University. He set to work figuring out why this trick works. When a reader focuses on a word, Pelli says, the eyes take in both central and peripheral views. The eye's perphery can't focus as narrowly, making it difficult to identify the letters in the middle of a word, so the brain recognizes the word as a unit based on the first and last letters, as well as key features such as dangling g's and tall d's. If the intervening letters are scrambled, the reader can still identify the word fairly quickly. Faster readers do this using sentence context. Pelli finds that when the whole sentence is scrambled to remove contextual information, slow and fast readers comprehend individual words, scrambled or not, at nearly the same rate. -- Laura Wright > > So... start with "doe, a deer, a female deer." (Okay, one *really* is > > starting with the root word "do", but it doesn't fit the trick!) So you [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Do you have one for people who use 's to indicate plurality? It annoys me > to no end, but is very, very common. No, but I wish I did! 3rd graders often use an apostrophe for plural words. It's as if they've discovered the apostrophe (while working w/ possessives) & now think that more is better. Or something. I have figured out a sort of rule for words that end in "o", though - whether to add just an "s", or an "es" for the plural from. It works a lot of the time, but not all. For foods (tomato, potato), use an "es", but for words that have to do w/ sound/music (radio, banjo, piano), add just "s". > Also a lot of people write 'loose' instead of 'lose' Maybe if a person realized that loose rhymes w/ moose - that the "oo" produces the "s" instead of "z" sound for that last consonant?? > and 'advise' instead of 'advice'. Can't advise you w/ advice for this one! ;-) But I agree - people screw up w/them a lot! > Those are three of my > biggest pet spelling peeves (and 'alot' instead of 'a lot', but I've almost > come to terms with that one). I used to be guilty of this last one: alot Vs. a lot. Was embarrassed when I finally discovered the correct form! And I bet I still occasionally slip up on it. Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon circa Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:19:40 -0500, in rec.pets.cats.health+behav, Cathy Friedmann (clfr@adelphia.net) said, > I used to be guilty of this last one: alot Vs. a lot. Was embarrassed when > I finally discovered the correct form! And I bet I still occasionally slip > up on it. Even people with a strong grasp of language occasionally drop blunders. To me, somebody who demonstrates facility with his or her primary language is permitted a lapse now and then, and allowed intentional colloquialism or even fabrication of words. I am of the opinion that once one has demonstrated facility, "playing" with language is not only acceptable, but further evidence of true comprehension. OTOH, somebody who can't construct a proper sentence hasn't "earned" the privilege of abusing the language, because s/he doesn't even realize that s/he is abusing it. Laura SignatureIt is a damn poor mind indeed which can't think of at least two ways to spell any word. -Andrew Jackson >circa Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:19:40 -0500, in rec.pets.cats.health+behav, >Cathy Friedmann (clfr@adelphia.net) said, [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >Laura Since we are soooooo off topic here, I'll put in my fifty cents. I understand that used to be two cents, but has suffered because of inflation. Should have said "to sense" to see what you would have said. There is no z in grease, no r in wash, no x in ask, no ch in the phrase "what are you doing?", there is no o in bird, and the first r in library is also pronounced. The word America does not end in an r, but the word car does. The e in tea is pronounced and the a is silent. Then again, I would be an even bigger mess without a spelling checker. In some parts of the US, the carbonated beverages that come in a can or plastic bottle, such as Coca Cola, Sprite and Orange Crush are called pop. In other areas they are called soda. Still others call it soda pop and finally some call it Coke, no matter what brand or flavor it is. Americans use an elevator and British use a lift. Same for apartment vs flat and truck vs lory. New Yorkers stand "on" line and most of the rest of the country stands "in" line. Interesting how we do things differently in different countries, even regions. Then you have the French. They speak an entirely different language. How can they possibly understand each other when they do that? LOL What is the plural of a single letter? I'm still contemplating the sheet of plastic and sprinkling dilithium crystals on it. Sparkle sparkle. It has made me (more) nuts. circa Sat, 21 Feb 2004 16:34:08 -0600, in rec.pets.cats.health+behav, Fan <> (Fan <>) said, > >circa Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:19:40 -0500, in rec.pets.cats.health+behav, > >Cathy Friedmann (clfr@adelphia.net) said, [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > inflation. Should have said "to sense" to see what you would have > said. I would likely have cringed; I just can't help it. :-) > There is no z in grease, no r in wash, no x in ask, no ch in the > phrase "what are you doing?", there is no o in bird, and the first r > in library is also pronounced. The word America does not end in an r, > but the word car does. The e in tea is pronounced and the a is silent. > Then again, I would be an even bigger mess without a spelling checker. The fact that you call it a "spelling checker" rather than a "spell checker" earns you extra props. > In some parts of the US, the carbonated beverages that come in a can > or plastic bottle, such as Coca Cola, Sprite and Orange Crush are > called pop. In other areas they are called soda. Still others call it > soda pop and finally some call it Coke, no matter what brand or flavor > it is. Whenever I visit my family and friends in Michigan, they make fun of me for calling it "soda". Of course, I make fun of them for calling it "pop", so we're even. > Americans use an elevator and British use a lift. Same for apartment > vs flat and truck vs lory. New Yorkers stand "on" line and most of the > rest of the country stands "in" line. Interesting how we do things > differently in different countries, even regions. Regional dialect is fascinating. Cringeworthy, often, but fascinating. > Then you have the French. They speak an entirely different language. > How can they possibly understand each other when they do that? LOL Put a Cajun and a Qu?becois in the same room and they have to speak English in order to understand each other. ;-) > What is the plural of a single letter? That one always gives me pause. I vary how I indicate it, depending on how anal I'm feeling that day. > I'm still contemplating the sheet of plastic and sprinkling dilithium > crystals on it. Sparkle sparkle. It has made me (more) nuts. Dilithium makes it too brittle for a good ass-lamination. Laura SignatureI am Dyslexia of Borg, Your a.s will be laminated. > In some parts of the US, the carbonated beverages that come in a can > or plastic bottle, such as Coca Cola, Sprite and Orange Crush are > called pop. In other areas they are called soda. Still others call it > soda pop and finally some call it Coke, no matter what brand or flavor > it is. And then there are hero sandwiches, subs, hoagies, & probably other variations, too. > Americans use an elevator and British use a lift. Same for apartment > vs flat and truck vs lory. Or the more amusing ones: Americans use an eraser and the British use a rubber. The British get knocked up in the morning, and Americans have someone knock on the door to wake them up. > New Yorkers stand "on" line I take it just NYC stands "on" line? I've never noticed when visiting, to tell the truth. Upstate (NYS), we stand "in" line. I have noticed that while Americans live "on" such & such street or road, that the British live "in" such & such street or road. > and most of the > rest of the country stands "in" line. Interesting how we do things > differently in different countries, even regions. It is interesting. Very. > What is the plural of a single letter? I don't know - always a problem. When you find out, please tell me! Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon on 22 Feb 2004: >> What is the plural of a single letter? > > I don't know - always a problem. When you find out, please tell me! When I read this the first time, I tried to figure out in what context one would need to know this? It goes to show you that some things don't come up in some conversations or writings. Do you guys mean something like "My neice earned all A's on her report card". ? SignatureCheryl Trapped like rats. In a chia-pet. MIB II circa Sun, 22 Feb 2004 12:44:45 -0600, in rec.pets.cats.health+behav, Cheryl (jlhshadow@NOSPAMhotmail.com) said, > >> What is the plural of a single letter? > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > in some conversations or writings. Do you guys mean something like "My > neice earned all A's on her report card". ? Yup. I posted something in here this weekend where I used a pluralized single letter, although I can't even remember what it was now. I just remember that I had a little internal debate about whether or not I should shove an apostrophe in there and decided not to for no reason other than that I didn't want to figure it out. :-) Laura SignatureI am Dyslexia of Borg, Your a.s will be laminated. Feb 2004: > Do you guys mean something like "My >> neice earned all A's on her report card". ? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > whether or not I should shove an apostrophe in there and decided not > to for no reason other than that I didn't want to figure it out. :-) Now that you mention it I'm not sure whether there is a correct way? Wouldn't it be the same way you pluralize an acronym? I find myself going both ways with that one, but only in email where it really doesn't matter as opposed to an actual report. I suppose we could just type A[s | 's]. ;) SignatureCheryl Trapped like rats. In a chia-pet. MIB II > on 22 Feb 2004: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > in some conversations or writings. Do you guys mean something like "My > neice earned all A's on her report card". ? Yep. Otoh, I figure if a group of some reasonably intelligent & educated bunch of people can't figure it out, why sweat it? And what about numbers? Same thing? Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon on 22 Feb 2004: > Yep. Otoh, I figure if a group of some reasonably intelligent & educated > bunch of people can't figure it out, why sweat it? > > And what about numbers? Same thing? Heehee. I spelled "niece" wrong. Or is that one of those where the "i before e except after c" doesn't apply.? It doesn't look right with the "i" first. lol We could go on for days with spelling. Unless you memorize certain words, there are just too dang many to mispell. Or is it "misspell". I give up. SignatureCheryl Trapped like rats. In a chia-pet. MIB II > on 22 Feb 2004: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > before e except after c" doesn't apply.? It doesn't look right with the > "i" first. lol Ah, but the "i" isn't after the "c", it's before it. We could go on for days with spelling. Unless you memorize > certain words, there are just too dang many to mispell. Or is it > "misspell". I give up. This particular one always gives me probs, too (I'll go with "misspell"). As does privilege. The word "ledge" has a "d" because of the 'short' "e" before the "ge" ending, yet privilege doesn't... And, to top it off, I don't know if I used the ' and " correctly in that sentence! ;-) Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon on 22 Feb 2004: > Ah, but the "i" isn't after the "c", it's before it. I read some of your other rules for spelling, and I like how you teach, Teach. :) My major problem words are those that don't sound like they are spelt. <-- ? lol Some I've been called on are "furnAture" when I know it is furniture. DefinAtely when I know it is definitely. There's phonetics for you. I rely on a "spelling checker". SignatureCheryl Trapped like rats. In a chia-pet. MIB II > on 22 Feb 2004: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > is furniture. DefinAtely when I know it is definitely. There's phonetics > for you. I rely on a "spelling checker". Ah, the schwa appears to be your undoing, then! It's that sort of "uh" sound, that any vowel can make. Like the "o" in lemon or dragon, or the "i" in pencil. Or in animal, both the "i" and the second "a" are schwas. For words w/a schwa or two, if the visualization of the word doesn't work, I tell the kids to say an-i-mal (pronouncing the short i & short a) in their heads, in order to spell it correctly - even though it's not pronounced that way. So you could say fur-ni (short i) -ture in your head while writing it. Like saying veg-e-ta-ble or Wed-nes-day in order to spell them correctly. Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon > -- > Cheryl > > Trapped like rats. In a chia-pet. > MIB II > So you could say fur-ni (short i) -ture in your head while writing it. > Like saying veg-e-ta-ble or Wed-nes-day in order to spell them > correctly. That's exactly what I do. I should also state that I have slight dyslexia, and often type 9 when I mean P and have to back up and correct it. Schwa. I never knew there was a name for it. Good thing I don't make my living where I have to spell correctly *ALL of the time*. It helps to make the point, but there is where I use a spell checker. :) SignatureCheryl Trapped like rats. In a chia-pet. MIB II "Cathy Friedmann" <clfr@adelphia.net> wrote in message news > I have noticed that while Americans live "on" such & such street or road, > that the British live "in" such & such street or road. That´s another one that always gets me thinking when I´m writing. Argh. > "Cathy Friedmann" <clfr@adelphia.net> wrote in message news > > I have noticed that while Americans live "on" such & such street or road, > > that the British live "in" such & such street or road. > > That?s another one that always gets me thinking when I?m writing. Argh. Here you go Liz. I had to dredge up this thread to post this link in. LOL An interesting peek into some common American phrases and words and how they are different depending on where you live, or even where your parents are from if you have learned some terminology from them. http://www.chuckchamblee.com/dom/fun/yankee_dixie_quiz.htm > > "Cathy Friedmann" <clfr@adelphia.net> wrote in message news > > > I have noticed that while Americans live "on" such & such street [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > http://www.chuckchamblee.com/dom/fun/yankee_dixie_quiz.htm I saw something very similar to this once, although it was much longer & then gave the results w/ graphics - maps. Anyway, I am a definitive Yankee. Makes sense, considering that I've lived in the NE my whole life. ;-) Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon > Anyway, I am a definitive Yankee. Makes sense, considering that I've > lived in the NE my whole life. ;-) Mine said borderline dixie. LOL But then again, Maryland is on the Mason- Dixon line. My parents were both from MA so a lot of words and phrases I learned from them. Cheryl <jlhshadow@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav: >> Anyway, I am a definitive Yankee. Makes sense, considering that >> I've lived in the NE my whole life. ;-) > > Mine said borderline dixie. LOL But then again, Maryland is on > the Mason- Dixon line. My parents were both from MA so a lot of > words and phrases I learned from them. Oddly it gave me Dixie. I was borning CA and lived briefly in Oregon and Utah. Back in CA when I was 10. Not sure how "Dixie" that's supposed to make me. The British get knocked up in the morning, and Americans have > someone knock on the door to wake them up. I am English, and "getting knocked up" means getting pregnant, which gives your sentence a whole new meaning! Jeannie "Jeannie" <jean@NOSPAMspackman@daikatana.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message > The British get knocked up in the morning, and Americans have > > someone knock on the door to wake them up. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Jeannie LOL. So the English get "knocked up" in the morning? ;) > "Jeannie" <jean@NOSPAMspackman@daikatana.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message > > The British get knocked up in the morning, and Americans have [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > LOL. So the English get "knocked up" in the morning? ;) I know I did! Jeannie > The British get knocked up in the morning, and Americans have > > someone knock on the door to wake them up. > > I am English, and "getting knocked up" means getting pregnant, which gives > your sentence a whole new meaning! Right, getting "knocked up" means getting pregnant in the U.S. (& maybe in Canada?), but I clearly understood that term have the much more innocuous meaning of knocking on the door to wake one up, in the U.K. Both from reading books by British authors, & the British phrase books I own. Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon >> > <Fan> wrote in message >news:8nlf30h1np1pirjbj54lgisn0p4cnn2ase@4ax.com... [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Cathy So, are you saying that I should not have been slapped for offering to wake up a female friend who happens to be from England? How was I supposed to know the language difference. LOL. Just kidding. On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 17:35:55 GMT, Laura R. <UseFirstInitialPlusRobinson@technologist.com> wrote: >circa Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:19:40 -0500, in rec.pets.cats.health+behav, >Cathy Friedmann (clfr@adelphia.net) said, In some parts of the US, the carbonated beverages that come in a can or plastic bottle, such as Coca Cola, Sprite and Orange Crush are called pop. In other areas they are called soda. Still others call it soda pop and finally some call it Coke, no matter what brand or flavor it is. In some places you put your groceries in paper bags (if they don't force you to use recycled plastic ones) in other places it's a sack. W Wendy <wendypart@nospam.com> wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav: > In some places you put your groceries in paper bags (if they don't > force you to use recycled plastic ones) in other places it's a > sack. I'm finding that in my new locale, it's not an accident, it's a wreck, and then there's the whole purse vs pocketbook thing. > Maybe if a person realized that loose rhymes w/ moose - that the "oo" > produces the "s" instead of "z" sound for that last consonant?? That's what I thought, too, but then someone pointed out to me that in some dialects, 'loose' is pronounced as 'lose'! It sure isn't in my dialect! It must be those Michiganders again! They screw everything up :-)! > Can't advise you w/ advice for this one! ;-) But I agree - people screw up > w/them a lot! Someone mentioned to me that some people pronounce "advice" just like "advise", too. That may be why they screw up the spelling. But spelling is not so much about pronunciation anymore (it hasn't been since sometime after the printing press was invented), it's about memorization and attention to detail. I'm convinced that people who are poor spellers either have poor memories or are fast readers (so they don't notice the spelling of words). I'm a fast reader, so that's my excuse :-)! rona Signature***For e-mail, replace .com with .ca Sorry for the inconvenience!*** > > Maybe if a person realized that loose rhymes w/ moose - that the "oo" > > produces the "s" instead of "z" sound for that last consonant?? > > That's what I thought, too, but then someone pointed out to me that in some > dialects, 'loose' is pronounced as 'lose'! It sure isn't in my dialect! Nor mine! > It must be those Michiganders again! They screw everything up :-)! > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > memories or are fast readers (so they don't notice the spelling of words). > I'm a fast reader, so that's my excuse :-)! I used to assume that good readers were automatically good spellers - and the other way around. But after about the first 10 years of working w/ kids who were great readers but poor spellers, or great spellers but poor readers, I changed my mind. Plus 2 people in my own family are voracious (& good) readers, but their spelling leaves something to be desired. ;-) So... I've decided that spelling is often simply a talent, & that it may - or may not - be linked w/ reading skills. The detail-oriented thing may be a part of the package, too, though... Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon >I used to assume that good readers were automatically good spellers - and >the other way around. But after about the first 10 years of working w/ kids [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Cathy Cathy, I've often wondered if the *way* we were taught to read, whether we were taught to read phonetically, contributes to the ability to spell well. One thing I *have* learned over the years is that the ability to spell has no bearing whatsoever on education or intelligence. Some of the smartest people I know are lousy spellers. Sherry circa 22 Feb 2004 06:15:08 GMT, in rec.pets.cats.health+behav, Sherry (sriddles@aol.comkitty) said, > One > thing I *have* learned over the years is that the ability to spell has no > bearing whatsoever on education or intelligence. Some of the smartest people I > know are lousy spellers. It has more to do with which areas of a brain a person uses than anything, but there *is* a difference between a smart person who can't spell and an idiot who can't spell- the smart person at least *tries*. Laura SignatureI am Dyslexia of Borg, Your a.s will be laminated. > >I used to assume that good readers were automatically good spellers - and > >the other way around. But after about the first 10 years of working w/ kids [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Cathy, I've often wondered if the *way* we were taught to read, whether we were > taught to read phonetically, contributes to the ability to spell well. I also used to think that perhaps that came into play - "sight" Vs. phonics, for ex. I was taught via phonics (can still remember my 1st gr. teacher explaining the 'silent e', for ex. - whoa! - all of a sudden I could read *tons* of new words I didn't know a few minutes ago!). But I think my father was taught via sight, & my sister learned to read phonetically; both are good readers but mot-so-hot spellers. Plus I've always (since '72) taught reading phonetically (okay, some words are sight words, but basically...), & after about 10 years of teaching, that's when I decided that it's just as much of a talent than anything else. Plus, I'm a visual learner, & find that I spell both by how word look (it either looks right, or doesn't), & phonetically - breaking words up into syllables & letter-sound relationships w/in the syllables. So... I think there's quite a mix in there. ;-) > One > thing I *have* learned over the years is that the ability to spell has no > bearing whatsoever on education or intelligence. Some of the smartest people I > know are lousy spellers. Absolutely. And sometimes I've hit upon great spellers - or even great oral readers, complete with expression, no less - who are not very intelligent. Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon circa Sun, 22 Feb 2004 11:01:14 -0500, in rec.pets.cats.health+behav, Cathy Friedmann (clfr@adelphia.net) said, > > Cathy, I've often wondered if the *way* we were taught to read, whether we > were [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > letter-sound relationships w/in the syllables. So... I think there's quite > a mix in there. ;-) I tend to think that children who are taught phonics are often better spellers overall, but I'm a poor example of it. Like you, I am a visual learner/thinker. I'm also what I've heard termed as a "spontaneous reader". When I was two years old, I walked into the kitchen with a book and started reading it aloud to my mother. It wasn't that I'd memorized the book, as I was able to read any book my mother handed to me, whether I'd seen it before or not. Apparently there are some people who, being highly visual learners, will "crack the code" of letters and numbers and simply learn to read without being taught to do so. By the time we started learning phonics in school, I had, of course, been reading for years, so while I remember learning phonics, I also remember it being little more than an exercise in penmanship. When my younger sister was four years old, I somehow got it into my head that she was too old to not know how to read (hey, I was nine, what can I say?), and I taught her to read. Unfortunately, her kindergarten teacher was an idiot and never even realized that my sister could read. Regardless, both of us are voracious readers and good spellers, although my sister's typing is atrocious and she'll make goofy spelling mistakes (for which I rib her mercilessly <G>). With that said, although both my sister and I would probably be exceptions to my belief that kids who learn phonics end up better readers and spellers, I've found in the adults with whom I've discussed this that those who learned phonics do tend to be more facile with English than most of those who didn't. Another glaring exception, however, is a Swedish friend of mine who learned English by watching television as a child in Sweden, where American shows are exported and subtitled in Swedish with the original English soundtracks left intact. He has a far, far better grasp of English than the majority of the native speakers I know. I'm also a believer in the theories of multiple intelligences, and I do think that a lot of one's facility with language is simply the result of how one is "wired". I know some very intelligent people who can't spell to save their lives. *However*, I've also found that most people who are intelligent are also able to make the effort to overcome their lack of natural ease with the written word and to produce at least generally well-constructed sentences. While my inability to see horrible grammatical/spelling blunders without cringing is my own problem, I do notice a difference between people who have a hard-wired difficulty with writing and people who are simply idiots. People for whom language isn't a natural intelligence usually produce writing wherein it is clear that malapropisms and misspellings spring from them having been writing quickly and not noticing that their brains are moving faster than their fingers. People who are just ignorant tend to produce entire blocks of text that is poorly structured, without coherent thought behind it, and riddled with lazy punctuation (repeated use of ellipses to separate sentences, for example). When I see something written by somebody who is clearly bright and it contains errors here and there, it doesn't bother me one-tenth as much as something written with absolutely zero concern for whether it's coherent or correctly put together. Okay, rant off; I've got stuff to finish. ;-) Laura SignatureI am Dyslexia of Borg, Your a.s will be laminated. > circa Sun, 22 Feb 2004 11:01:14 -0500, in rec.pets.cats.health+behav, > Cathy Friedmann (clfr@adelphia.net) said, [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > wasn't that I'd memorized the book, as I was able to read any book my > mother handed to me, whether I'd seen it before or not. I was nothing like that, re: spontaneously learning to read. I remember standing next to my mother one evening while she was reading; I must've been 4. I was looking at the print on the page & wondering how on earth one went about turning those symbols into words. In first grade I was thrilled to find out that learning to read was a *whole* lot easier that I'd assumed it would be. (Not a perfect analogy by any stretch, but - a little like learning to drive stick shift; I used to wonder - as a child - just how people knew when to shift; it was a complete mystery to me. It became very apparent once I was doing the driving, & could sense the revs of the engine!) > Apparently there are some people who, being highly visual learners, > will "crack the code" of letters and numbers and simply learn to read > without being taught to do so. By the time we started learning > phonics in school, I had, of course, been reading for years, so while > I remember learning phonics, I also remember it being little more > than an exercise in penmanship. That wasn't me. If someone explains something to me, point-blank, I'm fine. Otherwise... it may take a good long while for something to dawn on me. ;-) So I am extremely thankful that 'whole language' was not in vogue when I was in elem. school. Technically, specific skills are supposed to be taught while using the whole language method of teaching reading. But in reality, it seemed to be more of a 'they'll learn it through osmosis' approach, which never would've worked w/ me. I never bought into using whole language as a teaching method, & thankfully (IMO) it is now slipping out of vogue again. Case in point: My niece (now 16, & an honor->high honor student) absolutely *loved* books as a toddler & pre-schooler, but she wasn't a particularly good reader in elem. school, which my sister & I couldn't really figure out. Until one day, when L (niece) was in 4th grade, my sister was helping her w/ some reading HW & discovered that she didn't even know the super-basic 'silent e make the previous vowel long' rule! She'd written "cub" & asked L what it was; L said "cub". She then wrote "cube" & asked what it said. L replied, "...Cube???" "Yes, correct," said my sister; "Why is this word cube, while the other one is cub?" L had no clue! Arghhh! Neither of us could believe that she'd never learned something so basic (a product of the whole language approach...), something which we'd been taught in gr.1! My sister tipped off L's teacher, & she was - along w/ several other bright, but under-achieving readers - put into an intensive phonics class, thank goodness; that helped. > When my younger sister was four years old, I somehow got it into my > head that she was too old to not know how to read (hey, I was nine, > what can I say?), and I taught her to read. Unfortunately, her > kindergarten teacher was an idiot and never even realized that my > sister could read. How can one *miss* a kid in Kdg. who can already read?! > Regardless, both of us are voracious readers and good spellers, > although my sister's typing is atrocious and she'll make goofy [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > exceptions to my belief that kids who learn phonics end up better > readers and spellers, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the scales are tipped in that direction. But the correlation between being a good reader & a good speller isn't there as often as I initially (rather naively?) assumed it would be. I've found in the adults with whom I've > discussed this that those who learned phonics do tend to be more > facile with English than most of those who didn't. Another glaring [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > result of how one is "wired". I know some very intelligent people who > can't spell to save their lives. Oh, yes, I'm in complete agreement. *However*, I've also found that most > people who are intelligent are also able to make the effort to > overcome their lack of natural ease with the written word and to > produce at least generally well-constructed sentences. Yes. > While my inability to see horrible grammatical/spelling blunders > without cringing is my own problem, I do notice a difference between [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Okay, rant off; I've got stuff to finish. ;-) Ah, but this was more interesting, is my guess? ;-) Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon >I was nothing like that, re: spontaneously learning to read. I remember >standing next to my mother one evening while she was reading; I must've been >4. I was looking at the print on the page & wondering how on earth one went >about turning those symbols into words. In first grade I was thrilled to >find out that learning to read was a *whole* lot easier that I'd assumed it >would be. I read long before the first grade, because my big sister came home every day and made me play "school" with her, and of course she got to be the teacher. I used to think I was hot stuff because when I *did* start school, the teacher always asked me to hand out papers, because I was the only one who could read the names. The things we remember! Sherry > >I was nothing like that, re: spontaneously learning to read. I remember > >standing next to my mother one evening while she was reading; I must've been [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > always asked me to hand out papers, because I was the only one who could read > the names. The things we remember! I was/am the big sister. ;-) When my sister was in 1st grade, I'd come home from French I & teach her some French. ;-) Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon >When my sister was in 1st grade, I'd come home from French I & teach her >some French. ;-) > >Cathy I hope the phrases you taught her were nice ones!! (I'm picturing the perfect opportunity for a big-sister practtical joke!) Sherry > >When my sister was in 1st grade, I'd come home from French I & teach her > >some French. ;-) [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Sherry The worst it got was "Fermez la grande bouche!" or "Que tu es b?te!" I didn't learn/know anything like "Merde!" yet. ;-) Otoh... in college, a friend was going to Paris/France for the first time, & she knew zilcho French. She wanted to know some practical stuff, phrase-wise, so we - friends - had her memorize, "Voulez vous couchez avec moi ce soir?", telling her that it meant "Where's the Ladies' room?" <eg> She faithfully practice & practiced the pronunciation. Just before she left, we realized that we truly couldn't send her off uttering that phrase on a constant basis to all & sundry, so finally told her the truth. ;-) Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon >Otoh... in college, a friend was going to Paris/France for the first time, & >she knew zilcho French. She wanted to know some practical stuff, [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >-- Now, you can't leave us non-French speaking people hanging like that. Translation!! Sherry > >Otoh... in college, a friend was going to Paris/France for the first time, & > >she knew zilcho French. She wanted to know some practical stuff, [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Sherry Oh, whoops. ;-) It means, "Do you want to go to bed w/ me tonight?" Just remembered: do you by any chance remember the song "Lady Marmalade", around '72-'73ish? It had that phrase in it. Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon >Oh, whoops. ;-) It means, "Do you want to go to bed w/ me tonight?" > >Just remembered: do you by any chance remember the song "Lady Marmalade", >around '72-'73ish? It had that phrase in it. > >Cathy Of course I do. "Hey Sister, go Sister"...I don't remember the artist tho...so *that's* what they were saying??? Not quite as nasty as our little junior-high brains imagined... :=) Sherry > >Oh, whoops. ;-) It means, "Do you want to go to bed w/ me tonight?" > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Of course I do. "Hey Sister, go Sister"... Yep, that's the one. I don't remember the artist tho... Me, neither. so > *that's* what they were saying??? Not quite as nasty as our little junior-high > brains imagined... :=) Oh, jeez - I'd recently graduated from college when that song came out... Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon > >Oh, whoops. ;-) It means, "Do you want to go to bed w/ me tonight?" > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > *that's* what they were saying??? Not quite as nasty as our little junior-high > brains imagined... :=) Voulez-vous couchez avec moi? I was studying French, so I understand them perfectly. :) Patti LaBelle rules. Signaturehttp://www.mindspring.com/~slywy/ http://slywy.diaryland.com/ "Cathy Friedmann" <clfr@adelphia.net> dumped this in news:c1h74k$1ik6dl$1 @ID-103542.news.uni-berlin.de on 24 Feb 2004: > Just remembered: do you by any chance remember the song "Lady Marmalade", > around '72-'73ish? It had that phrase in it. In addition, Moulin Rouge re-does that song. Excellent movie for anyone who hasn't seen it. Cheryl <jlhshadow@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav: > "Cathy Friedmann" <clfr@adelphia.net> dumped this in > news:c1h74k$1ik6dl$1 @ID-103542.news.uni-berlin.de on 24 Feb 2004: [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > In addition, Moulin Rouge re-does that song. Excellent movie for > anyone who hasn't seen it. I thought I was the only one who liked it. The only thing I DIDN'T like about it was the crappy camerawork. I could tell there was some awesome choreography in there, but no one bothered to pull back, hold still, and shoot it for even a few seconds. > Cheryl <jlhshadow@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in > rec.pets.cats.health+behav: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > awesome choreography in there, but no one bothered to pull back, hold > still, and shoot it for even a few seconds. The chemistry between Nicole Kiddman and that guy (I don't know his name) was amazing. The whole idea of the movie was amazing. I LOVED it. The Elton John song made me cry like you wouldn't believe. The ending made me cry. Awesome movie. I like movies like that, beyond the imagination. Cheryl <jlhshadow@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in rec.pets.cats.health+behav: > The chemistry between Nicole Kiddman and that guy (I don't know > his name) was amazing. The whole idea of the movie was amazing. > I LOVED it. The Elton John song made me cry like you wouldn't > believe. The ending made me cry. Awesome movie. I like movies > like that, beyond the imagination. Ewan MacGregor. He does a lot of off-beat films. I haven't seen it, but he's in an apparently equally weird film "Big Fish." Just dawned on me... Translations: (re: teaching little sister some French) > The worst it got was "Fermez la grande bouche!" Shut your big mouth! or "Que tu es b?te!" You are *so* stupid! > I didn't learn/know anything like "Merde!" yet. ;-) sh.t! Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon > Now, you can't leave us non-French speaking people hanging like that. > Translation!! > > Sherry >> >When my sister was in 1st grade, I'd come home from French I & teach her >> >some French. ;-) [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > >Cathy That was terrible, ROFLMAO. They did something like that in the movie "My Big Fat Greek Wedding." They told the main character, a male, to say some phrases in Greek. One turned out to be "I have three testicles" another was a comment about his future mother-in-law's large breasts. It too, was very funny. Feb 2004: > One > thing I *have* learned over the years is that the ability to spell has > no bearing whatsoever on education or intelligence. Some of the > smartest people I know are lousy spellers. True. My father, who is retired now, was a nuclear physicist. His spelling was atrocious at times and he relied on a spell-checker. But a more brilliant man I've never met. SignatureCheryl Trapped like rats. In a chia-pet. MIB II >So... I've decided that spelling is often simply a talent, & that it may - >or may not - be linked w/ reading skills. The detail-oriented thing may be >a part of the package, too, though... > >Cathy Arrrgghh. That's the part that got left out of my package. :-( Sherry >So... I've decided that spelling is often simply a talent, & that it may - >or may not - be linked w/ reading skills. The detail-oriented thing may be >a part of the package, too, though... > >Cathy Arrrgghh. That's the part that got left out of my package. :-( Sherry Detail oriented alone won't do it. My dh is very detail oriented but can't spell to save his soul. I've seen him spell underwear underwere, yogurt yogert, and cereal Corn Flakes because that he could read off the box. I am the failure from a family of excellent spellers. Can't say I'm any good with punctuation either. To me commas are what you use to separate run on sentences (or is that runon or maybe run-on). <wendy crawls back under her rock circa Thu, 26 Feb 2004 16:30:02 -0500, in rec.pets.cats.health+behav, Wendy (wendypart@nospam.com) said, > Arrrgghh. That's the part that got left out of my package. :-( > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > <wendy crawls back under her rock> But your posts demonstrate either a clear effort or a great spelling/grammar checker. :-) Laura SignatureI am Dyslexia of Borg, Your a.s will be laminated. circa Sat, 21 Feb 2004 19:14:56 -0600, in rec.pets.cats.health+behav, Rona Yuthasastrakosol (prasantrin@yahoo.com) said, > > Maybe if a person realized that loose rhymes w/ moose - that the "oo" > > produces the "s" instead of "z" sound for that last consonant?? > > That's what I thought, too, but then someone pointed out to me that in some > dialects, 'loose' is pronounced as 'lose'! It sure isn't in my dialect! It > must be those Michiganders again! They screw everything up :-)! Nah, it's the Canadian influence that messed 'em up in the first place! ;-) Laura SignatureI am Dyslexia of Borg, Your a.s will be laminated. > So... start with "doe, a deer, a female deer." (Okay, one *really* is > starting with the root word "do", but it doesn't fit the trick!) So you > have one doe; now make it plural: imagine seeing some does in a meadow. > Then deal w/ the "n't" bit if you need the contraction "doesn't". Do you have one for people who use 's to indicate plurality? It annoys me to no end, but is very, very common. Also a lot of people write 'loose' instead of 'lose' and 'advise' instead of 'advice'. Those are three of my biggest pet spelling peeves (and 'alot' instead of 'a lot', but I've almost come to terms with that one). The lose/loose one is good for chuckles sometimes if one is into mental images. I suspect people make far fewer spelling mistakes if they aren't typing. Sometimes those wrong spellings just come flying off the fingertips. I'm forever typing the wrong their/there/they're. W circa Thu, 26 Feb 2004 15:53:22 -0500, in rec.pets.cats.health+behav, Wendy (wendypart@nospam.com) said, > I suspect people make far fewer spelling mistakes if they aren't typing. True. Brain be faster than fingers. :-) Laura SignatureI am Dyslexia of Borg, Your a.s will be laminated. >From: "Cathy Friedmann" >> >From: "Cathy Friedmann" clfr@adelphia.net >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > >Cathy Thanks, Cathy. I think these will be great with my young niece. She's 7. I bet you're a very good teacher :) Lauren ________ See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm -- Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon > >From: "Cathy Friedmann" > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > Thanks, Cathy. I think these will be great with my young niece. She's 7. > I bet you're a very good teacher :) Mais, merci. ;-) When she hits the mult. tables (& therefore attendant div. facts, as in fact families), there are a bunch of mnemonic devices for the various multiplication facts. [Ex: 4X4=16. You have to be at least 16 years old (in NYS) to have a license to drive a 4x4 vehicle.] Plus ways to look at the products - when written in order, as in writing out the tables - lots of patterns, that are really interesting, & help, too, w/ the memorization. You may already realize this sort of thing, but anyway... For ex: writing out the table for the 3s: you get 0, 3, 6, 9,12,15,18, 21, 24, 27, 30, 33, & 36 as the products. If you add the digits of the 2-digit products, you then get a pattern (ignoring the initial "0") that goes: 3-6-9, 3-6-9, 3-6-9, 3-6-9. (Which goes along w/ the fact that you're multiplying/repeatedly adding 3.) When I was little, we were given the facts, told to memorize them, & that was that. This sort of thing makes math a while lot more fun, IMO. ;-) And your niece's teacher will most likely incorporate it into her lessons. Cathy "Cathy Friedmann" <clfr@adelphia.net> wrote in message > When I was little, we were given the facts, told to memorize them, & that > was that. This sort of thing makes math a while lot more fun, IMO. ;-) > And your niece's teacher will most likely incorporat |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message