Where has he gone?

[EFLImpudence]

I'm not so sure about the 'should not' - would not "milage" be pronounced "mill-aj" or "mill-age"?

No. On the contrary. You would, as you write, need two Ls for that (assuming that's what you meant) - MILL. MALL(road, not shopping centre) MOLL MULL
A single consonant after a vowel means the long vowel - MILE. MALE MOLE MULE.
With Mileage, there is no need for the E - MILAGE. Mileage should be pronounced - MY LEEJ.

I can find no reason nor even consistency of explanation for Judgment for Judgement.
There is no reason to drop the E - either compared to similarly spelt words
nor if it derives from the French; JUGE, JUGER, JUGEMENT
where a following E makes the sound of G as a J.
It's not really possible to pronounce judgment properly.

It would seem to be another example of the dreaded evolution.



Evolution (of language)
n.
The legitimising of errors by the majority.

 

[JohnW2]

No. On the contrary. You would, as you write, need two Ls for that (assuming that's what you meant) ... A single consonant after a vowel means the long vowel - MILE. MALE MOLE MULE. With Mileage, there is no need for the E - MILAGE. Mileage should be pronounced - MY LEEJ.

Maybe, but that seems to be far from an unbroken or unbreakable rule. Just thinking of words which end in -age, how about forage, mirage and savage, for starters?

I can find no reason nor even consistency of explanation for Judgment for Judgement. There is no reason to drop the E - either compared to similarly spelt words nor if it derives from the French; JUGE, JUGER, JUGEMENT where a following E makes the sound of G as a J. It's not really possible to pronounce judgment properly. It would seem to be another example of the dreaded evolution.

Indeed, but a quick look online seems to indicate that there is a lot of dispute/controversy about which direction that evolution worked, and even as to which is the more commonly used spelling. For example:

"In American English, judgement is generally considered a misspelling of judgment for all uses of the word, notwithstanding individual preferences. In British popular usage, judgment was traditionally the preferred form, but judgement has gained ground over the last couple of centuries and is now nearly as common as judgment."

I must admit that I only recently became aware of this issue, when a lawyer systematically removed all the "e"s from a document I had written which made repeated references to Court Judg(e)ments. Subsequent investigation has revealed that the version without an "e" is almost universally used in legal circles. Interestingly, my barrister daughter (who also has a degree in English!) said that she did not even know that it could be spelt (or is it spelled? ) with an "e"!

Kind REgards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

Maybe, but that seems to be far from an unbroken or unbreakable rule. Just thinking of words which end in -age, how about forage, mirage and savage, for starters?

I don't think that is related. Those are just words which happen to end in 'age'.
They're not 'fore', 'mire', and 'save' with a suffix, are they?

Indeed, but a quick look online seems to indicate that there is a lot of dispute/controversy about which direction that evolution worked, and even as to which is the more commonly used spelling.

That's what I said - no logical reason nor even consistency in the explanation.

I must admit that I only recently became aware of this issue, when a lawyer systematically removed all the "e"s from a document I had written which made repeated references to Court Judg(e)ments. Subsequent investigation has revealed that the version without an "e" is almost universally used in legal circles. Interestingly, my barrister daughter (who also has a degree in English!) said that she did not even know that it could be spelt (or is it spelled? ) with an "e"!

Well, I didn't realise it was (could be?) spelt (yes) without the 'e'.
Your daughter was obviously in the converse position but did she omit the 'e' in similar words - particularly when the preceding letter is a consonant?
Apt for the legal profession - enforcment, for example.

 

[JohnW2]

I don't think that is related. Those are just words which happen to end in 'age'.
They're not 'fore', 'mire', and 'save' with a suffix, are they?

Sorry - I thought you were postulating a general rule about the effect of single/double consonants on the length of a preceding vowel.

That's what I said - no logical reason nor even consistency in the explanation.

I'm inclined to agree. However, if you believed those who say that "judgment" was (for whatever reason) 'the original', which changed to "judgement" centuries later, would you not be unhappy with that 'evolution'?

Well, I didn't realise it was (could be?) spelt (yes) without the 'e'.
Your daughter was obviously in the converse position but did she omit the 'e' in similar words - particularly when the preceding letter is a consonant?

Not that I am aware of. Mind you, I wouldn't take her as necessarily being an authority on such things - just as many brilliant mathematicians are not very good with simple arithmetic, I get the impression that many with good degrees in English are also far from good in their knowledge/use of grammar/spelling etc. (She certainly has a big problem with apostrophes!)!

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

Sorry - I thought you were postulating a general rule about the effect of single/double consonants on the length of a preceding vowel.

Sorry, missed the point.

Yes, there are exceptions to every rule in English
Forage, mirage and savage are just French words, aren't they?

What about garage? Do you pronounce it like Farage pronounces his name or are you as common as I am and say 'garridge'?

 

[JohnW2]

What about garage? Do you pronounce it like Farage pronounces his name or are you as common as I am and say 'garridge'?

As you imply, most of us use the latter but I know a few ('posh', or quasi-posh?) who use the former. ... and it's the 'stress' as well as the pronunciation of the letters - you and I put the stress on the first syllable, whereas 'they' put it on the second.

Kind Regards, John

 

[DaveHerns]

So are we all bored with talking about BAS?

 

[JohnW2]

So are we all bored with talking about BAS?

I think I've said all that I want/need to say about him. It's probably also very frustrating for him, since I imagine he is very probably still 'looking', even though not posting.

Given that there were countless ('not first offence') occasions when he would very probably have been thrown out of many a forum, I certainly find it ironic that the situation which brought about his departure was one in which, as far as I can make out, he was very much 'in the right'. Admittedly, many/most of us would not have reacted to the situation in the way he did (by 'resigning'), but that doesn't mean that he was any way 'not right'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[eveares]

Been busy the last few weeks so have not been on here recently, but if it was not for my thread what started the debacle , there is a good chance BAS would still be on here.

I suppose it could of been someone else's thread though and that the fact it was mine was just a coincidence.

 

[JohnW2]

Been busy the last few weeks so have not been on here recently, but if it was not for my thread what started the debacle , there is a good chance BAS would still be on here. I suppose it could of been someone else's thread though and that the fact it was mine was just a coincidence.

I certainly don't think you should feel in any way guilty or 'responsible' for what happened. As you say, it could have happened in virtually any thread, and it is fairly clear who was essentially responsible for what happened. Although it was clash of two very stubborn people, just one of them (not BAS) was in the wrong (and the whole problem was that he would not admit it).

Kind Regards, John

 

[333rocky333]

That thread is so edited it dont do ban justice.
at the risk of the thread getting locked and myself punished.

Bans original post is still there:
ban-all-sheds said: ↑
And with a fixed impedance, if the voltage drops, the current, now think, yes, that drops too.
And this is how Winston tried to justify himself.

 

[DaveHerns]

So now we know how it all came to a head.

 

[JohnW2]

So now we know how it all came to a head.

Well, that's how it started. As I understand it, it 'came to a head' because his repeated demands for an apology (for having been accused of 'lying') were ignored and systematically removed by the mods, culminating in a situation in which they started 'moderating' all of his posts before they appeared in the forum.

Kind Regards, John

 

[scousespark]

On what grounds does anybody in here think they have the right to diagnose the state of bas's mental health state, based on his posts in here? He comes across as pedantic and doesn't back down. He's not alone there (and that's not me having a go at anybody). I'm not aware of anybody in here being a qualified psychiatrist or clinical psychologist and, even if there were, I'd be stunned if anybody could diagnose any patient without seeing him/her.

I'm amazed that (repeatedly) demanding an apology is all it took to get the mods on his back. Some of his insults were beyond the pale.

 

[JohnW2]

Good to see you (on a Monday ). I trust all is well.

On what grounds does anybody in here think they have the right to diagnose the state of bas's mental health state, based on his posts in here?

Quite so. I have repeatedly made that point in this thread, as well as previously over the years. Even speculating about his state of mental health would be bad enough, but the sort of assertions we've seen here about what condition he 'probably has' (i.e. 'a diagnosis') is both ridiculous and, IMO, unacceptable.

I'm amazed that (repeatedly) demanding an apology is all it took to get the mods on his back. Some of his insults were beyond the pale.

Indeed so. As I recently wrote, it's ironic that he repeatedly 'survived' events for which he could easily have been thrown out, yet ended up feeling obliged to resign because the mods took (albeit modest) action in a situation in which he was essentially not at fault (other than for 'tedious persistence' - but his sense of justice seemingly required that).

Kind Regards, John