"robyks" <robyks@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:mttcl31p4ep5to6lfbesi99mdrckv8hi5f@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 17:46:50 +1300, "Paul J Kriha"
> <paul.nospam.kriha@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >"robyks" <robyks@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:qt3bl39tvbpeveelbf02leftcu07skrm3t@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 02:43:58 +1300, "Paul J Kriha"
> >> <paul.nospam.kriha@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>
> >> >> > What's "louc^" in English? My idiotic dictionary says
> >> >> > "resinuous wood". Yeah, okay, but what do you call those
> >> >> > thin pieces of wood used for lighting in medieval times.
> >> >> > And I don't mean torches.
> >> >> > pjk
> >> >>
> >> >> Why *don't* you mean torches?
> >> >
> >> >Because I don't. I mean "louc^", not "pochoden^".
> >> >
> >> >> In American English it is exactly what that is ;-)
> >> >
> >> >Okay then, but I wouldn't know much about that.
> >> >pjk
> >>
> >> Try "taper". In Collins it corresponds with louc^, in a fa****on.
> >
> >Okay, we have another word.
> >In my Collins it's something like a spill, or a thin candle.
>
> Yes it is. Also: "any feeble source of light".
It's late late night, I feel like one just now.
> >> BTW, it is cheering to see a correct spelling of Fluorescent. Far too
> >> often one encounters Flourescent.
> >
> >That spelling is probably favoured by people more
> >familiar with scent of flour than smell of fluor. :-)
>
> I have came across it in publications, on labels...
> Another word often misapplied is Course, when the intended meaning is
> Coarse (i.e. sand paper).
Yeah, that's all the finicky English grammer. :-)
Or perhaps even gremmer.
One of my favoured misspelling I saw a number of times,
typically in the US hardware store adverts: "Rot Iron Gates".
I don't think I would like to pay for rot iron anything, let alone
for rot iron gates and fences. :-)
pjk
|
