The European Commission has just announced an agreement whereby English
will be the official language of the European Union rather than German,
which was the other possibility.

As part of the negotiations, the British Government conceded that English
spelling had some room for improvement and has accepted a 5 year phase-in
plan that would become known as "Euro-English".

In the first year, "s" will replace the soft "c". Sertainly, this will
make the sivil servants jump with joy. The hard "c" will be dropped in
favour of "k". This should klear up konfusion, and keyboards kan have one
less letter.

There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year when the
troublesome "ph" will be replaced with "f". This will make words like
fotograf 20% shorter.

In the 3rd year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted to
reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible.

Governments will enkourage the removal of double letters which have always
ben a deterent to akurate speling.

Also, al wil agre that the horibl mes of the silent "e" in the languag
is disgrasful and it should go away.

By the 4th yer people wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing "th" with
"z" and "w" with "v".

During ze fifz yer, ze unesesary "o" kan be dropd from vords kontaining
"ou" and after ziz fifz yer, ve vil hav a reil sensi bl riten styl.

Zer vil be no mor trubl or difikultis and evrivun vil find it ezi tu
understand ech oza. Ze drem of a united urop vil finali kum tru.

Und efter ze fifz yer, ve vil al be speking German like zey vunted in ze
forst plas.

Hoodia Gordonii wrote:

[good stuff]

Although your example seems and is extreme, it is about time logic was
applied to the english language.

Each and every generation must wade though all these english rules and
"special cases."

About time changes where implemented to speed them on their way ...

Regards,
JS

Hoodia Gordonii ) writes:

It's bad enough that rec.radio.shortwave is now mostly off topic, thanks
to idiots like you who think it's okay to post off-topic junk, and
think you get "permission" by putting "ot" in the subject header.

But your an even greater idiot to cross-post this to rec.radio.amateur.misc
and rec.radio.amateur.policy

Cross-posting is bad enough in itself, there is rarely a good reason
to do so, but what you've done is pretty much pick a random topic
and cross-posted it to three newsgroups where it really has no
relevance. After all, you are saying it's off-topic.

Newsgroups don't need off topic junk. They need on topic material
in order to keep alive, and idiots like you then want to ride on
that success with your off-topic junk.

But the off-topic junk is more likely to drive away the actual contents
of the newsgroup, killing off any readership that you want to leech
on with the off-topic junk.

I've been reading and posting to this newsgroup for over a decade,
and there is ultimately less and less reason for me to even bother
to reply to a post, because there's hardly any on-topic posts, and
they are all hidden amonst your off-topic junk.

Go and find a newsgroup where this is relevant and stop cluttering
up newsgroups that are already damaged by junk.

Michael

On 28 Apr 2007 14:39:47 GMT, (Michael Black)
wrote:

Hoodia Gordonii ) writes:

It's bad enough that rec.radio.shortwave is now mostly off topic, thanks
to idiots like you who think it's okay to post off-topic junk, and
think you get "permission" by putting "ot" in the subject header.

But your an even greater idiot to cross-post this to rec.radio.amateur.misc
and rec.radio.amateur.policy

Cross-posting is bad enough in itself, there is rarely a good reason
to do so, but what you've done is pretty much pick a random topic
and cross-posted it to three newsgroups where it really has no
relevance. After all, you are saying it's off-topic.

Newsgroups don't need off topic junk. They need on topic material
in order to keep alive, and idiots like you then want to ride on
that success with your off-topic junk.

But the off-topic junk is more likely to drive away the actual contents
of the newsgroup, killing off any readership that you want to leech
on with the off-topic junk.

I've been reading and posting to this newsgroup for over a decade,
and there is ultimately less and less reason for me to even bother
to reply to a post, because there's hardly any on-topic posts, and
they are all hidden amonst your off-topic junk.

Go and find a newsgroup where this is relevant and stop cluttering
up newsgroups that are already damaged by junk.

Michael
Your reply is off topic as well.

On Apr 28, 6:33?am, John Smith I wrote:
Hoodia Gordonii wrote:

[good stuff]

No, and definitely NOT "original." The original has been cribbed by
dozens, rewritten for a specific subject, and tossed out as "new"
or "news" for years. Sigh...given some snazzy graphics this could
have been a "news" item for the "Onion." :-(

Although your example seems and is extreme, it is about time logic was
applied to the english language.

Each and every generation must wade though all these english rules and
"special cases."

Nonsense, JS, EVERY human language has its peculiarities, rules,
and convoluted forms. We can say, with some certainty, that:

"Mankind invented language to satisfy its need to complain." - anon.

73, Len AF6AY

AF6AY wrote:


...
"Mankind invented language to satisfy its need to complain." - anon.

73, Len AF6AY



I believe every math/tech/logic student who has been forced to take
untold english classes and study the insignificant "rules of english"
has argued the insanity and illogic of english, well, at least those
with a respectable IQ have ... the waste of time learning phone instead
of phone, pneumonia instead of neumonia, etc ... etc ... is simply mind
numbing!

Regards,
JS

John Smith I wrote:

In the previous post, change:

.... phone instead of phone, ...

to:

.... phone instead of fone ...

My gawd, idiots who continue to do something just because it has been
done that way for eons!; and, done WRONG at that!

Regards,
JS

On Apr 28, 11:43?am, John Smith I wrote:
John Smith I wrote:

In the previous post, change:

... phone instead of phone, ...

to:

... phone instead of fone ...

My gawd, idiots who continue to do something just because it has been
done that way for eons!; and, done WRONG at that!

Regards,
JS

Roger that...whatever you said...?

73, Len AF6AY

I forget when it was,but one time in America,it was put to a vote
whether America should keep the English language or adopt the German
language.The English language won by one vote.And I am glad it did.
cuhulin

AF6AY wrote:

...
Roger that...whatever you said...?

73, Len AF6AY


LOL!

Just can't shake 'ya today, can I?

Darn, where is Mark when 'ya need him? ;-)

Regards,
JS