A Sky, cable and digital tv forum. Digital TV Banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Digital TV Banter forum » Digital TV Newsgroups » uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General) (uk.tech.digital-tv) Discussion of all matters technical in origin related to the reception of digital television transmissions, be they via satellite, terrestrial or cable. Advertising is forbidden, with no exceptions.

TOT spelling



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 15th 13, 07:06 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Bill Wright[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,381
Default TOT spelling

I see that some contributors to this group spell certain simple short
words incorrectly, even though their general standard of literacy is
good. I always spell certain words wrongly. An example is 'rediculous'.
Anyone else aware of their habitual mistakes, but find themselves
powerless to improve?

Bill
  #2  
Old September 15th 13, 07:30 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Tim+
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 113
Default TOT spelling

Bill Wright wrote:
I see that some contributors to this group spell certain simple short
words incorrectly, even though their general standard of literacy is
good. I always spell certain words wrongly. An example is 'rediculous'.
Anyone else aware of their habitual mistakes, but find themselves powerless to improve?

Bill


My fingers insist on typing "form" instead of "from".

Tim
  #3  
Old September 15th 13, 07:53 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Andy Burns[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 215
Default TOT spelling

Tim+ wrote:

Bill Wright wrote:

I always spell certain words wrongly. An example is 'rediculous'.
Anyone else aware of their habitual mistakes, but find themselves
powerless to improve?


My fingers insist on typing "form" instead of "from".


Mine like "obviosuly".

  #4  
Old September 15th 13, 08:41 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
R. Mark Clayton
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,331
Default TOT spelling


"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
I see that some contributors to this group spell certain simple short words
incorrectly, even though their general standard of literacy is good. I
always spell certain words wrongly. An example is 'rediculous'. Anyone else
aware of their habitual mistakes, but find themselves powerless to improve?


Yes, but not powerless - I run emails through a spell checker before
dispatch.

Catches most but not all (e.g. from instead of form or vice versa).


Bill



  #5  
Old September 15th 13, 11:13 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Graham.[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,500
Default TOT spelling

On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 20:06:44 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

I see that some contributors to this group spell certain simple short
words incorrectly, even though their general standard of literacy is
good. I always spell certain words wrongly. An example is 'rediculous'.
Anyone else aware of their habitual mistakes, but find themselves
powerless to improve?

Bill



Mine are so numerous I couldn't begin to tell you. Thank heaven for
spell checkers.

Let's just hope the dreaded Mr Skitt isn't around as I type this.

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%
  #6  
Old September 16th 13, 12:15 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Johny B Good[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 853
Default TOT spelling

On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 20:06:44 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

I see that some contributors to this group spell certain simple short
words incorrectly, even though their general standard of literacy is
good. I always spell certain words wrongly. An example is 'rediculous'.
Anyone else aware of their habitual mistakes, but find themselves
powerless to improve?


I used to spell ratio as ration, original as origional, remember as
remeber. I usually spotted the mistakes during proof reading so was
able to correct them. I now find that I'm catching these habitual
mistakes on-the-fly.

I guess I'm not powerless in being able to improve my spelling - it
just takes practice. However, that doesn't stop me from still making
the odd typographical or compositional error now and again which
escapes my proof reading filter. If you spot any such errors in my
missives, it's only because I don't have an independent professional
proof reader in my employ.
--
Regards, J B Good
  #7  
Old September 16th 13, 12:26 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Bill Wright[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,381
Default TOT spelling

Johny B Good wrote:

I used to spell ratio as ration,


Some years ago I was asked to assess the likely veracity of a written
report. The report had 'ration' for 'ratio' throughout. It had been
professionally proofed.

Bill
  #8  
Old September 16th 13, 01:15 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Johny B Good[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 853
Default TOT spelling

On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 01:26:56 +0100, Bill Wright
wrote:

Johny B Good wrote:

I used to spell ratio as ration,


Some years ago I was asked to assess the likely veracity of a written
report. The report had 'ration' for 'ratio' throughout. It had been
professionally proofed.


I guess I'll make do with my DiY proof reading solution then and keep
the money. BTW, this free version of "Free Agent" doesn't have a spell
checker function. If I'm unsure of the spelling of a word, I'll simply
google it. Fortunately, my spelling abilities are pretty good so I'm
not googling for spellings very often.

I suspect that if I did use a spell checker, my spelling skills would
deteriorate (which is one of the reasons I eschewed the use of the
spell checker function in my previous mail/news reader client).
--
Regards, J B Good
  #9  
Old September 16th 13, 02:24 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Richard Tobin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,378
Default TOT spelling

In article ,
Bill Wright wrote:

Some years ago I was asked to assess the likely veracity of a written
report. The report had 'ration' for 'ratio' throughout.


Perhaps it had been written in the 17th century?

I have seen quite a few instances of "ration" being used for "rasher"
(of bacon), which seems to be a real misunderstanding. All by
Americans, I think.

-- Richard
  #10  
Old September 16th 13, 07:18 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Rob Gibson[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11
Default TOT spelling

I allways misspell always . . .
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.SEO by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2017 Digital TV Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.