The reciepe I have for chili calls for a course grind chuck. Before I
get a blank stair from my butcher when I ask him to course grind it,
I'd like to know what it looks like. Can someone describe it?

On May 18, 8:57 am, Dannyl > wrote:
> The reciepe I have for chili calls for a course grind chuck. Before I
> get a blank stair from my butcher when I ask him to course grind it,
> I'd like to know what it looks like. Can someone describe it?

Around here, chili grind is meat that's been run through the grinder
just once, using the plate with the largest openings, maybe 1/4 inch.
Thing is, the meat cooks down and looks like regular hamburger grind
by the time the chili is done.

I make my chili the old-fashioned way, by dicing the meat in cubes of
1/2 inch, or so.

David

david the elder wrote:
> On May 18, 8:57 am, Dannyl > wrote:
>> The reciepe I have for chili calls for a course grind chuck. Before
>> I get a blank stair from my butcher when I ask him to course grind
>> it, I'd like to know what it looks like. Can someone describe it?
>
> Around here, chili grind is meat that's been run through the grinder
> just once, using the plate with the largest openings, maybe 1/4 inch.
> Thing is, the meat cooks down and looks like regular hamburger grind
> by the time the chili is done.
>
> I make my chili the old-fashioned way, by dicing the meat in cubes of
> 1/2 inch, or so.
>
> David

I recommend diced beef or pork, too, unless I'm just throwing together a
quick and dirty pot of chili and ground beef is all I have on hand. Then I
don't care what the grind is.

Jill

Dannyl wrote:
> The reciepe I have for chili calls for a course grind chuck. *Before I
> get a blank stair from my butcher when I ask him to course grind it,
> I'd like to know what it looks like. *Can someone describe it?

That would be "coarse" grind, as for typical fresh Italian sausage...
usually through a grinding plate with at minimum 1/2" holes. You will
probably need to grind the meat yourself as most butcher shops are not
going to custom grind except for very large quantities, and coarse
grind chuck is really not very typical, usually when butcher shops
that do coarse grind it will be pork.

Here is some information about the various grinding plates:
http://tinyurl.com/2fwfl7
http://www.alliedkenco.com/catalog/i...d6195c26b1bc8c

Sheldon

On May 18, 8:57 am, Dannyl > wrote:
> The reciepe I have for chili calls for a course grind chuck. Before I
> get a blank stair from my butcher when I ask him to course grind it,
> I'd like to know what it looks like. Can someone describe it?

Why is it that so many people who post here can't spell?

It makes the folks on alt.punk look like English professors, and
several of them are from non-English speaking countries.

--Bryan

On 18 May 2007 09:24:07 -0700, Food Snob > wrote:

>Why is it that so many people who post here can't spell?
>
>It makes the folks on alt.punk look like English professors, and
>several of them are from non-English speaking countries.

I find it mildly amusing that you know about alt.punk? Interesting.
LOL

--
Zilbandy

Food Snob wrote:
> Dannyl wrote:
>
> > The reciepe I have for chili calls for a course grind chuck. *Before I
> > get a blank stair from my butcher when I ask him to course grind it,
> > I'd like to know what it looks like. *Can someone describe it?
>
> Why is it that so many people who post here can't spell?

Only one word is spelled incorrectly ("receipe") which is quite common
amongst even the very literate, and with very little stretch could be
construed as the very common "ei after c" typo... the others ("course/
stair") are spelled correctly but are the incorrect form, which is
indicative that English is not the poster's primary language,
especially since the sentences are better constructed and much more
intelligible than what the majority offer up. I think you're
unnecessarily knit picking.

On 18 May 2007 10:13:58 -0700, Sheldon > wrote:

>I think you're unnecessarily knit picking.

Actually, I believe the term you meant to use is "nitpicking", but who
am I to be such a nitpicker. ::ducking::

--
Zilbandy

On May 18, 12:49 pm, Zilbandy > wrote:
> On 18 May 2007 10:13:58 -0700, Sheldon > wrote:
>
> >I think you're unnecessarily knit picking.
>
> Actually, I believe the term you meant to use is "nitpicking", but who
> am I to be such a nitpicker. ::ducking::
>
> --
> Zilbandy

I "think" he did that on porpoise. ;-)

David

david the elder wrote:
> Zilbandy wrote:
> >Sheldon wrote:
>
> > >I think you're unnecessarily knit picking.
>
> > Actually, I believe the term you meant to use is "nitpicking", but who
> > am I to be such a nitpicker. ::ducking:: *
>
> I "think" he did that on porpoise. ;-)

I type like a squid out of water, all testicles.

Sheldon

In article .com>,
Food Snob > wrote:

> On May 18, 8:57 am, Dannyl > wrote:
> > The reciepe I have for chili calls for a course grind chuck. Before I
> > get a blank stair from my butcher when I ask him to course grind it,
> > I'd like to know what it looks like. Can someone describe it?
>
> Why is it that so many people who post here can't spell?

Splinter skill notwithstanding, I wonder if spelling skills might be
better overall if public school teachers spent more time on core
academics and less time trying to inflict their personal religious
beliefs on students.

Chili grind in my region is about a 1/4-3/8" diameter grind.

"Emma Thackery" > wrote in message
...
> In article .com>,
> Food Snob > wrote:
>
>> On May 18, 8:57 am, Dannyl > wrote:
>> > The reciepe I have for chili calls for a course grind chuck. Before I
>> > get a blank stair from my butcher when I ask him to course grind it,
>> > I'd like to know what it looks like. Can someone describe it?
>>
>> Why is it that so many people who post here can't spell?
>
> Splinter skill notwithstanding, I wonder if spelling skills might be
> better overall if public school teachers spent more time on core
> academics and less time trying to inflict their personal religious
> beliefs on students.

Religious beliefs don't enter it here, it's teaching to test. Screw skills
and core academics, they are teaching kids to take the stupid state tests
which doesn't necessarily tell you anything about a student's skills.

Cindi

>
> Chili grind in my region is about a 1/4-3/8" diameter grind.

Food Snob > wrote in news:1179505445.387371.107830
@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com:

> On May 18, 8:57 am, Dannyl > wrote:
>> The reciepe I have for chili calls for a course grind chuck. Before I
>> get a blank stair from my butcher when I ask him to course grind it,
>> I'd like to know what it looks like. Can someone describe it?
>
> Why is it that so many people who post here can't spell?
>
> It makes the folks on alt.punk look like English professors, and
> several of them are from non-English speaking countries.
>
> --Bryan
>

Here's an excerpt from:

http://www.use-net.ch/netiquette_engl.html#spelling

Every few months a plague descends on Usenet called the spelling flame.
It starts out when someone posts an article correcting the spelling or
grammar in some article. The immediate result seems to be for everyone on
the net to turn into a 6th grade English teacher and pick apart each
other's postings for a few weeks. This is not productive and tends to
cause people who used to be friends to get angry with each other.
It is important to remember that we all make mistakes, and that there are
many users on the net who use English as a second language. There are
also a number of people who suffer from dyslexia and who have difficulty
noticing their spelling mistakes. If you feel that you must make a
comment on the quality of a posting, please do so by mail, not on the
network.

Alternatively, if you want to discuss spelling, try he
alt.language.english.spelling.reform

M

On May 18, 2:53 pm, Morvin Stayner > wrote:
>
> Every few months a plague descends on Usenet called the spelling flame.
> It starts out when someone posts an article correcting the spelling or
> grammar in some article.

Point well taken, and I, for one, promise to take it to heart.

David

On May 18, 11:33 am, Zilbandy > wrote:
> On 18 May 2007 09:24:07 -0700, Food Snob > wrote:
>
> >Why is it that so many people who post here can't spell?
>
> >It makes the folks on alt.punk look like English professors, and
> >several of them are from non-English speaking countries.
>
> I find it mildly amusing that you know about alt.punk? Interesting.
> LOL

Know? I am the #1 all time poster on alt.punk.
The Bonobos are punker than punk.
http://www.myspace.com/TheBonobos
>
> --
> Zilbandy

--Bryan

On May 18, 2:51 pm, "Cindi - HappyMamatoThree"

> Religious beliefs don't enter it here, it's teaching to test. Screw skills
> and core academics, they are teaching kids to take the stupid state tests
> which doesn't necessarily tell you anything about a student's skills.
>
> Cindi

Yes, Cindi. I'm so glad I got to do my high school teaching before the
advent of standardized tests. One one my greatest (unintentional)
compliments came from a father who told me that he'd heard from his
son that not only was I teaching evolution in my biology class, but
that my tests had made him think. When I thanked him for that, he
stormed out. Heh!

OB food: Cook's night off tonight, with a supermarket roasted chicken
and a bag o'greens. Pork shoulder pot roast tomorrow, with some fresh
bread.

David

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> david the elder wrote:
>> On May 18, 8:57 am, Dannyl > wrote:
>>> The reciepe I have for chili calls for a course grind chuck. Before
>>> I get a blank stair from my butcher when I ask him to course grind
>>> it, I'd like to know what it looks like. Can someone describe it?
>>
>> Around here, chili grind is meat that's been run through the grinder
>> just once, using the plate with the largest openings, maybe 1/4 inch.
>> Thing is, the meat cooks down and looks like regular hamburger grind
>> by the time the chili is done.
>>
>> I make my chili the old-fashioned way, by dicing the meat in cubes of
>> 1/2 inch, or so.
>>
>> David
>
> I recommend diced beef or pork, too, unless I'm just throwing together a
> quick and dirty pot of chili and ground beef is all I have on hand. Then
> I
> don't care what the grind is.
>
> Jill
>
>
Diced meat, beef or pork, is not chili!

Kent

In article >,
"Cindi - HappyMamatoThree" > wrote:

> "Emma Thackery" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article .com>,
> > Food Snob > wrote:
> >
> >> On May 18, 8:57 am, Dannyl > wrote:
> >> > The reciepe I have for chili calls for a course grind chuck. Before I
> >> > get a blank stair from my butcher when I ask him to course grind it,
> >> > I'd like to know what it looks like. Can someone describe it?
> >>
> >> Why is it that so many people who post here can't spell?
> >
> > Splinter skill notwithstanding, I wonder if spelling skills might be
> > better overall if public school teachers spent more time on core
> > academics and less time trying to inflict their personal religious
> > beliefs on students.
>
> Religious beliefs don't enter it here, it's teaching to test. Screw skills
> and core academics, they are teaching kids to take the stupid state tests
> which doesn't necessarily tell you anything about a student's skills.

Ah yes, that too! Anything but critical thinking skills, especially in
the bible belt where I am.

Kent wrote:
> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
> ...
>> david the elder wrote:
>>> On May 18, 8:57 am, Dannyl > wrote:
>>>> The reciepe I have for chili calls for a course grind chuck.
>>>> Before I get a blank stair from my butcher when I ask him to
>>>> course grind it, I'd like to know what it looks like. Can someone
>>>> describe it?
>>>
>>> Around here, chili grind is meat that's been run through the grinder
>>> just once, using the plate with the largest openings, maybe 1/4
>>> inch. Thing is, the meat cooks down and looks like regular
>>> hamburger grind by the time the chili is done.
>>>
>>> I make my chili the old-fashioned way, by dicing the meat in cubes
>>> of 1/2 inch, or so.
>>>
>>> David
>>
>> I recommend diced beef or pork, too, unless I'm just throwing
>> together a quick and dirty pot of chili and ground beef is all I
>> have on hand. Then I
>> don't care what the grind is.
>>
>> Jill
>>
>>
> Diced meat, beef or pork, is not chili!
>
> Kent

Here we go again... a bowl of red; no meat and probably in your estimation
no beans, either. Just a bowl of hot spicy slop. Son, we aren't on a trail
ride but even then they had some beans to throw in the pot. Ask me how I
know. Historians will tell you; beans and dried meat were staples on the
trail and on cattle drives. Maybe you think guys want to eat sauce around a
campfire; somehow I think they want something more to dig their teeth into.
Give me until tomorrow and I'll dig up the sources PBS had for the trail
ride out to Montana and also for the Texas series they did with serving the
ranch hands. Tell me they didn't have meat and beans.

Jill

One of my friends is from Boston but she lives in Delaware (Slower
Lower) and she is learning how to cook. I emailed her my chili recipe
and she asked where were the beans.

Beans in chili?

I am from Texas... Nevah! LOL

Becca

Sqwertz wrote:
> Sheldon wrote:
>
> > indicative that English is not the poster's primary language,
>
> "Dan Landry", from Vermont, who uses American terms like "blank
> stare" and states his case in perfect spoken English

That should be perfectLY spoken English.

> sure sounds American to me.

There is no such thing as American English, y'all... there's no such
thing as UK English either.

But there is CCBD English... 3/4lb shrimp feeds six... must be Taysux
shrimp portioning. I've never met a Texan who could correctly
pronounce Texas... in fact if you ever you want to muzzle a Texan fit
em with a nose clip. And WTF is olive earl?

In article >,
Becca > wrote:

> Beans in chili?
>
> I am from Texas... Nevah! LOL


That's why it's called Chili *with* beans and not just "Chili".

Emma Thackery wrote:
> In article >,
> Becca > wrote:
>
>> Beans in chili?
>>
>> I am from Texas... Nevah! LOL
>
>
> That's why it's called Chili *with* beans and not just "Chili".

But Kent made it sound like there was no meat at all in chili. Unless he's
a vegetarian, and he didn't say so, there is meat in chili. Beans are
optional (but were usually served on the side on cattle drives). The
popularity of pinto beans isn't limited to Boston baked beans

On Sat, 19 May 2007 11:13:34 -0500, "jmcquown"
> wrote:

>The
>popularity of pinto beans isn't limited to Boston baked beans

Pinto beans in Boston Baked? Gag!
Small white (aka: navy) beans are best.

--
See return address to reply by email

On May 19, 11:13 am, "jmcquown" > wrote:

> But Kent made it sound like there was no meat at all in chili. Unless he's
> a vegetarian, and he didn't say so, there is meat in chili.

Jill, I took it that he was objecting to diced meat, rather than
ground, in chili.

David

david wrote on 19 May 2007 10:48:18 -0700:

??>> But Kent made it sound like there was no meat at all in
??>> chili. Unless he's a vegetarian, and he didn't say so,
??>> there is meat in chili.

dte> Jill, I took it that he was objecting to diced meat,
dte> rather than ground, in chili.

Chili can be "con carne" or "sin carne". Try

http://www.fiery-foods.com/dave/nancy0102.html for an
interesting set of recipes.





James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations:
not.jim.silverton.at.comcast.not

Cindi - HappyMamatoThree wrote:
> "Emma Thackery" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In article .com>,
>> Food Snob > wrote:
>>
>>> On May 18, 8:57 am, Dannyl > wrote:
>>>> The reciepe I have for chili calls for a course grind chuck.
>>>> Before I get a blank stair from my butcher when I ask him to
>>>> course grind it, I'd like to know what it looks like. Can someone
>>>> describe it?
>>>
>>> Why is it that so many people who post here can't spell?
>>
>> Splinter skill notwithstanding, I wonder if spelling skills might be
>> better overall if public school teachers spent more time on core
>> academics and less time trying to inflict their personal religious
>> beliefs on students.
>
> Religious beliefs don't enter it here, it's teaching to test. Screw
> skills and core academics, they are teaching kids to take the stupid
> state tests which doesn't necessarily tell you anything about a
> student's skills.
>
> Cindi
>
There was a news report just the other day about teachers "helping" kids
take the T-Cap tests. The tests were suspect because of a large number of
erasures on the majority of them but also because one of the students
(presumably one who could actually pass the test) ratted out the teacher.
The tests are used not only to measure student performance but also to grade
the teachers' abilities to instruct.

Jill

In article >,
"jmcquown" > wrote:

> Emma Thackery wrote:
> > In article >,
> > Becca > wrote:
> >
> >> Beans in chili?
> >>
> >> I am from Texas... Nevah! LOL
> >
> >
> > That's why it's called Chili *with* beans and not just "Chili".
>
> But Kent made it sound like there was no meat at all in chili. Unless he's
> a vegetarian, and he didn't say so, there is meat in chili. Beans are
> optional (but were usually served on the side on cattle drives). The
> popularity of pinto beans isn't limited to Boston baked beans

Traditional chili has meat in it, I agree.

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> david the elder wrote:
>> On May 18, 8:57 am, Dannyl > wrote:
>>> The reciepe I have for chili calls for a course grind chuck. Before
>>> I get a blank stair from my butcher when I ask him to course grind
>>> it, I'd like to know what it looks like. Can someone describe it?
>>
>> Around here, chili grind is meat that's been run through the grinder
>> just once, using the plate with the largest openings, maybe 1/4 inch.
>> Thing is, the meat cooks down and looks like regular hamburger grind
>> by the time the chili is done.
>>
>> I make my chili the old-fashioned way, by dicing the meat in cubes of
>> 1/2 inch, or so.
>>
>> David
>
> I recommend diced beef or pork, too, unless I'm just throwing together a
> quick and dirty pot of chili and ground beef is all I have on hand. Then
> I
> don't care what the grind is.
>
> Jill

Diced beef AND pork makes the best chili.

Mitch

On Sat, 19 May 2007 16:28:34 -0500, "jmcquown"
> wrote:

>There was a news report just the other day about teachers "helping" kids
>take the T-Cap tests. The tests were suspect because of a large number of
>erasures on the majority of them but also because one of the students
>(presumably one who could actually pass the test) ratted out the teacher.
>The tests are used not only to measure student performance but also to grade
>the teachers' abilities to instruct.


If student erasures were counted against me, I'd flunk. My (early
elementary SPED) students mark all the answers, 3 out of 4, or just
can't make up their minds and erase like mad. Most of their test
booklets are a mess. It's especially maddening to see only one
erasure - from correct to incorrect. Arrrrrgh! Sometimes, I want to
fall on my sword and just get it over with fast.

--
See return address to reply by email

On May 19, 11:29 am, Sheldon > wrote:
> Sqwertz wrote:
> > Sheldon wrote:
>
> > > indicative that English is not the poster's primary language,
>
> > "Dan Landry", from Vermont, who uses American terms like "blank
> > stare" and states his case in perfect spoken English
>
> That should be perfectLY spoken English.

Only if "perfect" modifies "spoken". If it modifies
"English", then there is no problem.

Cindy Hamilton

Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> Sheldon wrote:
> > Sqwertz wrote:
> > > Sheldon wrote:
>
> > > > indicative that English is not the poster's primary language,
>
> > > "Dan Landry", from Vermont, who uses American terms like "blank
> > > stare" and states his case in perfect spoken English
>
> > That should be perfectLY spoken English.
>
> Only if "perfect" modifies "spoken". *If it modifies
> "English", then there is no problem.

If... if... I got your IF!

It obviously modifies spoken... spoken is the very next word... the
only way it can modify English is if spoken were not there, but it
is. "perfect spoken English" is obviously dumb WOP idiomatic
English. It's perfectLY spoken English, even a pinheaded idiot knows
that. You can't pretend it's something it's not just to rationalize
nonsense. It's good you're not a teacher.

Sheldon

On May 21, 10:07 am, Sheldon > wrote:
> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> > Sheldon wrote:
> > > Sqwertz wrote:
> > > > Sheldon wrote:
>
> > > > > indicative that English is not the poster's primary language,
>
> > > > "Dan Landry", from Vermont, who uses American terms like "blank
> > > > stare" and states his case in perfect spoken English
>
> > > That should be perfectLY spoken English.
>
> > Only if "perfect" modifies "spoken". ?If it modifies
> > "English", then there is no problem.
>
> If... if... I got your IF!
>
> It obviously modifies spoken... spoken is the very next word... the
> only way it can modify English is if spoken were not there, but it
> is. "perfect spoken English" is obviously dumb WOP idiomatic
> English. It's perfectLY spoken English, even a pinheaded idiot knows
> that. You can't pretend it's something it's not just to rationalize
> nonsense. It's good you're not a teacher.
>
> Sheldon

Is the English perfect, or the "speaking" perfect? I am
inclined toward the former. I will go so far as to say
the original phrase should have been "perfect, spoken
English". Although I might have preferred "perfect,
idiomatic English" since no speaking was actually
involved.

If it were "perfectly spoken English", then I would expect
no mispronunciations. If it were "perfect, spoken English"
then I would expect no grammatical errors as well.

I have never been a teacher, but I have been a copyeditor.

Of course, 20 years of Usenet has somewhat deadened my
objection to errors of grammar and spelling.

Cindy Hamilton

In article .com>, Cindy Hamilton > wrote:
>On May 21, 10:07 am, Sheldon > wrote:
>> Cindy Hamilton wrote:

G'day Cindy,

Concerning the English debate with me old mate Shels, I think you are
both right and wrong. :-)

"Perfectly spoken English" is clearly English spoken perfectly.

"Perfect spoken English" is very rare these days, and probably always
was. "Perfect written English" is still possible occasionally; but
most spoken English is colloquial if not actually vulgar. ;-)

Cheers, Phred.

--
LID

On May 21, 10:07 am, Sheldon > wrote:
> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> > Sheldon wrote:
> > > Sqwertz wrote:
> > > > Sheldon wrote:
>
> > > > > indicative that English is not the poster's primary language,
>
> > > > "Dan Landry", from Vermont, who uses American terms like "blank
> > > > stare" and states his case in perfect spoken English
>
> > > That should be perfectLY spoken English.
>
> > Only if "perfect" modifies "spoken". ?If it modifies
> > "English", then there is no problem.
>
> If... if... I got your IF!
>
> It obviously modifies spoken... spoken is the very next word... the
> only way it can modify English is if spoken were not there, but it
> is. "perfect spoken English" is obviously dumb WOP idiomatic
> English. It's perfectLY spoken English, even a pinheaded idiot knows
> that. You can't pretend it's something it's not just to rationalize
> nonsense. It's good you're not a teacher.
>
> Sheldon

Is the English perfect, or the "speaking" perfect? I am
inclined toward the former. I will go so far as to say
the original phrase should have been "perfect, spoken
English". Although I might have preferred "perfect,
idiomatic English" since no speaking was actually
involved.

If it were "perfectly spoken English", then I would expect
no mispronunciations. If it were "perfect, spoken English"
then I would expect no grammatical errors as well.

I have never been a teacher, but I have been a copyeditor.

Of course, 20 years of Usenet has somewhat deadened my
objection to errors of grammar and spelling.

Cindy Hamilton

On May 21, 10:07 am, Sheldon > wrote:
> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> > Sheldon wrote:
> > > Sqwertz wrote:
> > > > Sheldon wrote:
>
> > > > > indicative that English is not the poster's primary language,
>
> > > > "Dan Landry", from Vermont, who uses American terms like "blank
> > > > stare" and states his case in perfect spoken English
>
> > > That should be perfectLY spoken English.
>
> > Only if "perfect" modifies "spoken". ?If it modifies
> > "English", then there is no problem.
>
> If... if... I got your IF!
>
> It obviously modifies spoken... spoken is the very next word... the
> only way it can modify English is if spoken were not there, but it
> is. "perfect spoken English" is obviously dumb WOP idiomatic
> English. It's perfectLY spoken English, even a pinheaded idiot knows
> that. You can't pretend it's something it's not just to rationalize
> nonsense. It's good you're not a teacher.
>
> Sheldon

Is the English perfect, or the "speaking" perfect? I am
inclined toward the former. I will go so far as to say
the original phrase should have been "perfect, spoken
English". Although I might have preferred "perfect,
idiomatic English" since no speaking was actually
involved.

If it were "perfectly spoken English", then I would expect
no mispronunciations. If it were "perfect, spoken English"
then I would expect no grammatical errors as well.

I have never been a teacher, but I have been a copyeditor.

Of course, 20 years of Usenet has somewhat deadened my
objection to errors of grammar and spelling.

Cindy Hamilton

On 22 May 2007 08:57:55 -0700, Cindy Hamilton
> wrote:

>On May 21, 10:07 am, Sheldon > wrote:
>> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>> > Sheldon wrote:
>> > > Sqwertz wrote:
>> > > > Sheldon wrote:
>>
>> > > > > indicative that English is not the poster's primary language,
>>
>> > > > "Dan Landry", from Vermont, who uses American terms like "blank
>> > > > stare" and states his case in perfect spoken English
>>
>> > > That should be perfectLY spoken English.
>>
>> > Only if "perfect" modifies "spoken". ?If it modifies
>> > "English", then there is no problem.
>>
>> If... if... I got your IF!
>>
>> It obviously modifies spoken... spoken is the very next word... the
>> only way it can modify English is if spoken were not there, but it
>> is. "perfect spoken English" is obviously dumb WOP idiomatic
>> English. It's perfectLY spoken English, even a pinheaded idiot knows
>> that. You can't pretend it's something it's not just to rationalize
>> nonsense. It's good you're not a teacher.
>>
>> Sheldon
>
>Is the English perfect, or the "speaking" perfect? I am
>inclined toward the former. I will go so far as to say
>the original phrase should have been "perfect, spoken
>English". Although I might have preferred "perfect,
>idiomatic English" since no speaking was actually
>involved.
>
>If it were "perfectly spoken English", then I would expect
>no mispronunciations. If it were "perfect, spoken English"
>then I would expect no grammatical errors as well.
>
>I have never been a teacher, but I have been a copyeditor.
>
>Of course, 20 years of Usenet has somewhat deadened my
>objection to errors of grammar and spelling.
>
>Cindy Hamilton

that has the same effect as reading sheldon's posts for twenty
minutes. he may not be a pinhead, but he doesn't have much on a
knitting needle.

your pal,
blake