nafex@lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: North American Fruit Explorers mailing list at ibiblio
List archive
- From: "Mark & Helen Angermayer" <hangermayer@isp.com>
- To: "North American Fruit Explorers" <nafex@lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [NAFEX] Stacey v. Staceyville
- Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2007 11:22:22 -0500
I know there are a ton of exceptions to English, but if I remember grammar
from grade school (a few years ago for all of us) don't you generally use
the short vowel sound when there is a double consonant following? As in the
words suffix, affix, annex. Words without a double consonant would have the
long sound, codex, latex, and remix.
If only my teacher could see me now,
Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: "loneroc" <loneroc@mwt.net>
To: "North American Fruit Explorers" <nafex@lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 6:41 AM
Subject: Re: [NAFEX] Stacey v. Staceyville
>
> 1. How is NAFEX pronounced? I've heard it a couple
> of different ways.
>
> I always said 'Nah (rhymes w/ 'yeah')-fecks until I attended a NAFEX
> meeting where I found that most people said 'Nay-fecks'.
>
> 2. Regarding the plum 'Jung's Big Red,' what is the
> true name of the variety, if different?
>
> Check out Jung's website, perhaps they'll know
> https://www.jungseed.com/jungsite/jungsiteCustServ.aspx
>
> 3. Is the pear 'Stacey' the same as 'Staceyville'?
>
> Yes
>
> Jerry in NW MN
> Zone 3a
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________
> ________
> > Don't pick lemons.
> > See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos.
> > http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html
> > _______________________________________________
> > nafex mailing list
> > nafex@lists.ibiblio.org
> >
> > Reproduction of list messages or archives is not allowed.
> > This includes distribution on other email lists or reproduction on web
> sites.
> > Permission to reproduce is NEVER granted, so don't claim you have
> permission!
> >
> > **YOU MUST BE SUBSCRIBED TO POST!**
> > Posts from email addresses that are not subscribed are discarded.
> > No exceptions.
> > ----
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe, go to the bottom of this page (also can be
> used to change other email options):
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/nafex
> >
> > File attachments are NOT stripped by this list.
> > TAKE STEPS TO PROTECT YOURSELF FROM COMPUTER VIRUSES!
> > Please do not send binary files.
> > Use plain text ONLY in emails!
> >
> > NAFEX web site: http://www.nafex.org/
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> nafex mailing list
> nafex@lists.ibiblio.org
>
> Reproduction of list messages or archives is not allowed.
> This includes distribution on other email lists or reproduction on web
sites.
> Permission to reproduce is NEVER granted, so don't claim you have
permission!
>
> **YOU MUST BE SUBSCRIBED TO POST!**
> Posts from email addresses that are not subscribed are discarded.
> No exceptions.
> ----
> To subscribe or unsubscribe, go to the bottom of this page (also can be
used to change other email options):
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/nafex
>
> File attachments are NOT stripped by this list.
> TAKE STEPS TO PROTECT YOURSELF FROM COMPUTER VIRUSES!
> Please do not send binary files.
> Use plain text ONLY in emails!
>
> NAFEX web site: http://www.nafex.org/
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.26/746 - Release Date: 4/4/07
1:09 PM
>
>
-
[NAFEX] misc. questions,
waayupnorth, 04/01/2007
-
Re: [NAFEX] Stacey v. Staceyville,
loneroc, 04/06/2007
-
Re: [NAFEX] Stacey v. Staceyville,
Mark & Helen Angermayer, 04/06/2007
-
Re: [NAFEX] Stacey v. Staceyville,
Michael Dossett, 04/06/2007
- Re: [NAFEX] Stacey v. Staceyville, Lucky Pittman, 04/06/2007
-
Re: [NAFEX] Stacey v. Staceyville,
Thomas Olenio, 04/06/2007
-
Re: [NAFEX] Stacey v. Staceyville,
Mark & Helen Angermayer, 04/06/2007
-
Re: [NAFEX] Stacey v. Staceyville,
Mark & Helen Angermayer, 04/06/2007
- Re: [NAFEX] Stacey v. Staceyville, tanis cuff, 04/06/2007
-
Re: [NAFEX] Stacey v. Staceyville,
Mark & Helen Angermayer, 04/06/2007
-
Re: [NAFEX] Stacey v. Staceyville,
Mark & Helen Angermayer, 04/06/2007
-
Re: [NAFEX] Stacey v. Staceyville,
Michael Dossett, 04/06/2007
-
Re: [NAFEX] Stacey v. Staceyville,
Mark & Helen Angermayer, 04/06/2007
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: [NAFEX] misc. questions, Bassem Samaan, 04/02/2007
-
Re: [NAFEX] Stacey v. Staceyville,
loneroc, 04/06/2007
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.