|
On Sunday 09 August 2015 15:51:10 Richard Owlett wrote: > Lisi Reisz wrote: > > [snip] > > > >> Because it's not a tax. > > > > In effect, it is an apothecated tax. But we are reluctant to acknowledge > > that. > > I did a duckduckgo search for "apothecated". I got a bunch of > colonial dictionaries. Their definitions seemed to make no sense > in context. > > What's the Crown's definition? > P.S. I've been been fascinated by linguistics for > .5 century > due to Latin teacher reputed to have tutored Romulus et al and an > English teacher reciting Beowulf in "original" with a running > translation [*NOTE BENE* the quotation marks ;] > > Paraphrasing 'somebody', "Inquiring minds want to know". It's not apothecated, it is hypothecated,
David |