On 09/02/2006 20:48, Rochelle Altman wrote:
...
Are you stating that your knowledge of the History of the English language is culled from non dot edu websites? Condensation of material for a post to a list is not an error.
It seems clear that the matter is not as clear cut as you first presented it. It is also more complex than I realised. OK, you have a right to simplify arguments, but in that case you should admit that you have simplified them.
I know what's in the APPOINTED Version published in 1611 and known as the KJV. (The AUTHORIZED version is Coverdale's -- authorized by Henry VIII). ...
And who called it the Authorised Version? Not me.
...
You seem to have a genius for missing the main points in posts:
Perhaps I have a genius for noticing when people's main points are based on uncertain arguments. I know I don't always respond to the main point of a post. But I do think it is important to challenge poorly based arguments even when they are only supporting matters....And so do I. If I have made any which I have not corrected, please let me know.
When I do make a mistake, Peter, I admit it and correct it as soon as I spot it.
--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.