On Sat, Aug 28, 2004 at 02:08:32PM +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote: > On Sat, Aug 28, 2004 at 12:00:29AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > And there are ideographic ones, for which there is no alphabetic > > relation between the letters and the pronounciation. That's the > > present example, in which most English speakers pronounce "i.e." as > > "that IS" and "e.g." as "fr eg-ZAM-pl". > BTW: now that we are off-topic I can ask something I always wanted to know > :) I have the habit to spell "i.e." as "in especially" or more gramatically > correct "especially". Is this a habit so uncommon or has anybody an idea > where i might have picked that up? Given that this is not the meaning of "i.e.", I hope this is uncommon... :) -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature