Dotted capital I

[jgharston]

Where has this illiterate obsession with putting a dot over a
*CAPITAL* letter I come from? I first noticed it on a film - I
think it was Kindergarten Cop - where the teacher said: well
done Katie, and a dot over the 'I' - even though the child had
written K A T I E.

...and why aren't these sorts of teachers shot before they
are allowed anywhere near any learners?

PLAY iT SAFE
THE FLiNTSTONES
FAMiLY GUY
THE SiMPSONS
etc

JGH

[Duggy]

On Feb 8, 11:43 am, jgharston <j...@arcade.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Where has this illiterate obsession with putting a dot over a
> *CAPITAL* letter I come from? I first noticed it on a film - I
> think it was Kindergarten Cop - where the teacher said: well
> done Katie, and a dot over the 'I' - even though the child had
> written K A T I E.
>
> ...and why aren't these sorts of teachers shot before they
> are allowed anywhere near any learners?

You know Kindergarten Cop was a movie and it was an actor not an
actual teacher, right?

> PLAY iT SAFE

Huh?

> THE FLiNTSTONES

It's cute and cartoony. Like the Ts being oversized.

> FAMiLY GUY

Not a dot, a television.
http://www.google.com.au/search?um=1&hl=en&rlz=1C1CHKB_en-GBAU443AU443&biw=1280&bih=935&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=Family+Guy+logo&btnG=Search

> THE SiMPSONS
No:
http://www.google.com.au/search?um=1&hl=en&rlz=1C1CHKB_en-GBAU443AU443&biw=1280&bih=935&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=The+Simpsons+logo&btnG=Search

===
= DUG.
===

[Robert Bannister]

Yeah, they should draw little hearts instead.


--
Robert Bannister

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

jgharston wrote:
>
> Where has this illiterate obsession with putting
> a dot over a *CAPITAL* letter I come from?
>

Blame the Turks.

--
~~~ Reinhold {Rey} Aman ~~~
I need Facebook's "social network"
like I need a social disease.

[Duggy]

On Feb 8, 3:00 pm, Reinhold {Rey} Aman <a...@sonic.net> wrote:
> jgharston wrote:
>
> > Where has this illiterate obsession with putting
> > a dot over a *CAPITAL* letter I come from?
>
> Blame the Turks.

It's nobody's business but the Turks.

===
= DUG.
===

[R H Draney]

Reinhold {Rey} Aman filted:

>
>jgharston wrote:
>>
>> Where has this illiterate obsession with putting
>> a dot over a *CAPITAL* letter I come from?
>>
>Blame the Turks.

That's nobody's business but....r


--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

On 2012-02-08 05:00:01 +0000, Reinhold {Rey} Aman said:

> jgharston wrote:
>>
>> Where has this illiterate obsession with putting
>> a dot over a *CAPITAL* letter I come from?
>>
> Blame the Turks.

Right. I suppose if you're writing in Turkish it could be regarded as
illiterate to put a dot where it doesn't belong (or omitting one where
it does), but in English it is not illiterate; it's just not the usual
convention. An I with a dot over it is still an I. Some people cross
their 7s; others don't: neither is an illiterate version of the other.

--
athel

[Pablo]

Athel Cornish-Bowden escribió:

> Right. I suppose if you're writing in Turkish it could be regarded as
> illiterate to put a dot where it doesn't belong (or omitting one where
> it does), but in English it is not illiterate; it's just not the usual
> convention. An I with a dot over it is still an I. Some people cross
> their 7s; others don't: neither is an illiterate version of the other.
>

Here in Europe, if you don't cross your seven, it's a one.

--
Pablo

[CT]

Pablo wrote:

> Here in Europe, if you don't cross your seven, it's a one.

Yes, but it wouldn't be needed if you didn't write your ones to look
like sevens in the first place.

--
Chris

[Pablo]

CT escribió:

Not me. I'm British. But the European 1 has a wotsit, yes. So it looks like
a 7 to us.

--
Pablo

[CT]

Pablo wrote:

> CT escribió:
>
> > Pablo wrote:
> >
> >> Here in Europe, if you don't cross your seven, it's a one.
> >
> > Yes, but it wouldn't be needed if you didn't write your ones to look
> > like sevens in the first place.
>
> Not me. I'm British.

Sorry, I took the 2 of "Here in Europe", added the 2 of "Pablo" and it
came to 5 :o)

> But the European 1 has a wotsit, yes. So it
> looks like a 7 to us.

Cheesy Wotsit?

--
Chris

[Pablo]

CT escribió:

> Pablo wrote:
>
>> CT escribió:
>>
>> > Pablo wrote:
>> >
>> >> Here in Europe, if you don't cross your seven, it's a one.
>> >
>> > Yes, but it wouldn't be needed if you didn't write your ones to look
>> > like sevens in the first place.
>>
>> Not me. I'm British.
>
> Sorry, I took the 2 of "Here in Europe", added the 2 of "Pablo" and it
> came to 5 :o)

NAHAY?

--
Pablo

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Exactly, and I suspect that at least in some cases people put a dot on
an I to make sure it isn't read as a 1*. In the early days of
computing, when everything was in CAPITALS, it was common to cross O
and leave 0 uncrossed (though to make sure everyone was thoroughly
confused some people did the opposite). I don't think it was regarded
as illiterate or a sign that a Danish invasion was imminent.

*Personally I'd be more likely to write the serifs than to dot it, but
I wouldn't regard dotting it as illiterate.




--
athel

[CT]

Pablo wrote:

> CT escribió:

>
> > Sorry, I took the 2 of "Here in Europe", added the 2 of "Pablo" and
> > it came to 5 :o)
>
> NAHAY?

New enough not to know everyone's personal circumstances, yeah!

--
Chris

[Pablo]

CT escribió:

It was a subtle doobry. You know me in another place by the anglo-saxon
version of my name.

--
Pablo

[CT]

Pablo wrote:

> It was a subtle doobry. You know me in another place by the
> anglo-saxon version of my name.

<fx:light bulb>

Oh, 'ello :o)

--
Chris

[Nick Spalding]

Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote, in <9pf7af...@mid.individual.net>
on Wed, 8 Feb 2012 13:15:22 +0100:

>On 2012-02-08 10:23:40 +0100, Pablo <no...@nowhere.net> said:
>
>> Athel Cornish-Bowden escribió:
>>
>>> Right. I suppose if you're writing in Turkish it could be regarded as
>>> illiterate to put a dot where it doesn't belong (or omitting one where
>>> it does), but in English it is not illiterate; it's just not the usual
>>> convention. An I with a dot over it is still an I. Some people cross
>>> their 7s; others don't: neither is an illiterate version of the other.
>>>
>>
>> Here in Europe, if you don't cross your seven, it's a one.
>
>Exactly, and I suspect that at least in some cases people put a dot on
>an I to make sure it isn't read as a 1*. In the early days of
>computing, when everything was in CAPITALS, it was common to cross O
>and leave 0 uncrossed (though to make sure everyone was thoroughly
>confused some people did the opposite). I don't think it was regarded
>as illiterate or a sign that a Danish invasion was imminent.

Except where it was exactly the opposite. If you moved around from
one shop to another you needed to know the local culture.

>*Personally I'd be more likely to write the serifs than to dot it, but
>I wouldn't regard dotting it as illiterate.
--

Nick Spalding
BrE/IrE

[jgharston]

Duggy wrote:
> > think it was Kindergarten Cop - where the teacher said: well
> > done Katie, and a dot over the 'I' - even though the child had
> > written K A T I E.
>

> You know Kindergarten Cop was a movie and it was an actor not an
> actual teacher, right?

Movies reflect real life, and people learn what is "real life"
from watching movies. People think that you have sex fully
clothed, because that's how it's done in movies. People give
birth inside a tent, because that's how it's done in movies.
People lust after women's bottoms, because that's what's done
in movies.

> > PLAY iT SAFE
>
> Huh?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtoQbXzNqkg&feature=related
from 32 seconds in, what spawned my current rant.

JGH

[John Varela]

On Wed, 8 Feb 2012 12:15:22 UTC, Athel Cornish-Bowden
<athe...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> Exactly, and I suspect that at least in some cases people put a dot on
> an I to make sure it isn't read as a 1*. In the early days of
> computing, when everything was in CAPITALS, it was common to cross O
> and leave 0 uncrossed (though to make sure everyone was thoroughly
> confused some people did the opposite).

We crossed our zeroes and put serifs on our I's so they wouldn't
look like ones. I also crossed my Z's so they wouldn't look like 2s.

There were also people who put a dot in the middle of either 0 or O
instead of crossing one of them. (Was that a Univac thing?) The font
I am using here (OS/2 System VIO) puts a dot in the zero in addition
to making the 0 narrower than the O.

--
John Varela

[Peter Moylan]

Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
> jgharston wrote:
>> Where has this illiterate obsession with putting
>> a dot over a *CAPITAL* letter I come from?
>>
> Blame the Turks.
>

Does a Turkish dotted i keep its dot in upper case? I suppose it would
have to.

--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.

[Peter Moylan]

That's a serious trap for the many Europeans who have migrated to
Australia. What is the bank supposed to do when a cheque says "fifteen
dollars" in words but "$75" in numerals? Maybe that's one of the reasons
cheques are now close to extinction.

(I cross my own 7s, but I don't put a hook on a 1.)

[Peter Moylan]

Nick Spalding wrote:
> Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote, in <9pf7af...@mid.individual.net>
> on Wed, 8 Feb 2012 13:15:22 +0100:
>
>> On 2012-02-08 10:23:40 +0100, Pablo <no...@nowhere.net> said:
>>
>>> Athel Cornish-Bowden escribió:
>>>
>>>> Right. I suppose if you're writing in Turkish it could be regarded as
>>>> illiterate to put a dot where it doesn't belong (or omitting one where
>>>> it does), but in English it is not illiterate; it's just not the usual
>>>> convention. An I with a dot over it is still an I. Some people cross
>>>> their 7s; others don't: neither is an illiterate version of the other.
>>>>
>>> Here in Europe, if you don't cross your seven, it's a one.
>> Exactly, and I suspect that at least in some cases people put a dot on
>> an I to make sure it isn't read as a 1*. In the early days of
>> computing, when everything was in CAPITALS, it was common to cross O
>> and leave 0 uncrossed (though to make sure everyone was thoroughly
>> confused some people did the opposite). I don't think it was regarded
>> as illiterate or a sign that a Danish invasion was imminent.
>
> Except where it was exactly the opposite. If you moved around from
> one shop to another you needed to know the local culture.

One thing that was consistent from place to place, though, was that the
letter "I" had to have very prominent serifs on coding forms.

At least in English-speaking places. I suppose that in continental
Europe it was the digit "1" that had the prominent serif.

>
>> *Personally I'd be more likely to write the serifs than to dot it, but
>> I wouldn't regard dotting it as illiterate.


--

[Christian Weisgerber]

Athel Cornish-Bowden <athe...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> Exactly, and I suspect that at least in some cases people put a dot on
> an I to make sure it isn't read as a 1*.

I think the whole dot on the i business started so the letter
wouldn't get lost among the other squiggles.

> In the early days of computing, when everything was in CAPITALS,
> it was common to cross O and leave 0 uncrossed (though to make sure
> everyone was thoroughly confused some people did the opposite). I
> don't think it was regarded as illiterate or a sign that a Danish
> invasion was imminent.

I don't know about the olden days, but in the 1980s, when the
upper/lower case distinction was well established, slashed zeros
were ubiquitous. Many dot matrix printers had them or had DIP
switches to choose between slashed and unslashed zeros.

In fact, if you switch a modern PC into VGA text mode, you'll still
get slashed zeros on the screen, or zeros with a middle dot.

--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de

[Joe Fineman]

jgharston <j...@arcade.demon.co.uk> writes:

> Where has this illiterate obsession with putting a dot over a
> *CAPITAL* letter I come from?

I think "semiliterate habit" is a better description than "illiterate
obsession". It has been going on at least since my childhood
(1940s). It is the most common case of a more general confusion
between lowercase & capital -- perhaps encouraged by the use of
"dotting one's i's" as a metaphor for "being careful".

In my day, American children were taught to read & write cursive, and
to read print, but not to write separate roman letters. Indeed, the
attempt to do so was not even called writing, but printing ("Please
print", the instructions on forms said), and pupils were left to their
own devices when the occasion arose. Very many of them grew up
producing capitals & lowercase either randomly or according to their
tastes. Such people usually recognized the need to distinguish I from
l & 1, and they accomplished that either with serifs or with a dot.
--
--- Joe Fineman jo...@verizon.net

||: Despair is the only way out. :||

[Robert Bannister]

Moreover, its wotsit is clearly visible in the font I am viewing.

[Robert Bannister]

My email address contains a figure one, and the only way I can write so
that people don't mistake it for an l or an I is by adding a prominent
serif - not as large as a Continental serif perhaps, but prominent all
the same.

[Mike Lyle]

Ah, I see. Display fonts are allowed to be a law unto themselves,
though. For once in my life, I tend to agree with the design mentality
rather than the brainy one: it does look nice in this case.

I'm sorry to discover my overwhelming admiration for women's bottoms
isn't me at all, but the projection of some Svengali.

--
Mike.

[Glenn Knickerbocker]

On 2/7/2012 8:43 PM, jgharston wrote:
> Where has this illiterate obsession with putting a dot over a
> *CAPITAL* letter I come from?

Turkey, but it's not illiterate there.

ŹR

[Peter Moylan]

I bet it doesn't dangle all the way down to the baseline, though.

[Skitt]

Peter Moylan wrote:

> Robert Bannister wrote:
>> Pablo wrote:
>>> CT escribió:
>>>> Pablo wrote:

>>>>> Here in Europe, if you don't cross your seven, it's a one.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, but it wouldn't be needed if you didn't write your ones to look
>>>> like sevens in the first place.
>>>
>>> Not me. I'm British. But the European 1 has a wotsit, yes. So it looks
>>> like a 7 to us.
>>
>> Moreover, its wotsit is clearly visible in the font I am viewing.
>
> I bet it doesn't dangle all the way down to the baseline, though.
>

That depends on the writer's style. When I was still living in Europe,
my ones had a thin upstroke that often started at the baseline, and
their downstrokes were much broader. This was when I was still using a
pen that permitted broadness variations in writing.

--
Skitt (SF Bay Area)
http://come.to/skitt

[Duggy]

On Feb 9, 2:45 am, jgharston <j...@arcade.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Duggy wrote:
> > > think it was Kindergarten Cop - where the teacher said: well
> > > done Katie, and a dot over the 'I' - even though the child had
> > > written K A T I E.
> > You know Kindergarten Cop was a movie and it was an actor not an
> > actual teacher, right?
> Movies reflect real life,

Not always.

> People think that you have sex fully
> clothed, because that's how it's done in movies.

It happens from time to time.

> > > PLAY iT SAFE
> > Huh?

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtoQbXzNqkg&feature=related
> from 32 seconds in, what spawned my current rant.

Fine. Why the lies about other shows?

===
= DUG.
===

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Peter Moylan wrote:
>
> Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
>> jgharston wrote:
>
>>> Where has this illiterate obsession with putting
>>> a dot over a *CAPITAL* letter I come from?
>>>
>> Blame the Turks.
>>
> Does a Turkish dotted i keep its dot in upper case?
> I suppose it would have to.
>

Yes. See:

http://www.readliterature.com/turkish-characters.jpg

--
~~~ Reinhold {Rey} Aman ~~~
I need Facebook's "social network"
like I need a social disease.

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
>
> Peter Moylan wrote:
>> Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
>>> jgharston wrote:
>>
>>>> Where has this illiterate obsession with putting
>>>> a dot over a *CAPITAL* letter I come from?
>>>>
>>> Blame the Turks.
>>>
>> Does a Turkish dotted i keep its dot in upper case?
>> I suppose it would have to.
>>
> Yes. See:
>
> http://www.readliterature.com/turkish-characters.jpg
>

I forgot: The Ukrainians put TWO dots over the "I" (second row):

<http://images.lingvozone.com/languages/Language%20Information33_files/image001.gif>

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Christian Weisgerber wrote:

>
> Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>
>> Exactly, and I suspect that at least in some cases people
>> put a dot on an I to make sure it isn't read as a 1*.
>
> I think the whole dot on the i business started so the letter
> wouldn't get lost among the other squiggles.
>

minimim.

[Jared]

On 2/8/2012 9:08 PM, Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
> Peter Moylan wrote:
>>
>> Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
>>> jgharston wrote:
>>
>>>> Where has this illiterate obsession with putting
>>>> a dot over a *CAPITAL* letter I come from?
>>>>
>>> Blame the Turks.
>>>
>> Does a Turkish dotted i keep its dot in upper case?
>> I suppose it would have to.
>>
> Yes. See:
>
> http://www.readliterature.com/turkish-characters.jpg
>

I does, but J doesn't?

--
Jared

[James Hogg]

Peter Moylan wrote:
> Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
>> jgharston wrote:
>>> Where has this illiterate obsession with putting
>>> a dot over a *CAPITAL* letter I come from?
>>>
>> Blame the Turks.
>>
> Does a Turkish dotted i keep its dot in upper case? I suppose it would
> have to.

Yes, it keeps the dot in upper case.

I just tested Microsoft Word to see whether the toggle to upper case
works when a word is marked as Turkish. I.t does.

--
James

[James Hogg]

Well, it looked all right when I sent İt.

--
James

[Fred]

On 9/02/2012 5:45 a.m., jgharston wrote:
> Duggy wrote:
>>> think it was Kindergarten Cop - where the teacher said: well
>>> done Katie, and a dot over the 'I' - even though the child had
>>> written K A T I E.
>>
>> You know Kindergarten Cop was a movie and it was an actor not an
>> actual teacher, right?
>
> Movies reflect real life, and people learn what is "real life"
> from watching movies. People think that you have sex fully
> clothed, because that's how it's done in movies.

That's how it's done in movie theatres.

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Jared wrote:
>
> Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
>> Peter Moylan wrote:
>>> Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:
>>>> jgharston wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Where has this illiterate obsession with putting
>>>>> a dot over a *CAPITAL* letter I come from?
>>>>>
>>>> Blame the Turks.
>>>>
>>> Does a Turkish dotted i keep its dot in upper case?
>>> I suppose it would have to.
>>>
>> Yes. See:
>>
>> http://www.readliterature.com/turkish-characters.jpg
>>
> I does, but J doesn't?
>

There is no need for a dot on the upper-case "J", because there isn't a
"dotted j" vs. an "undotted j", just a regular "j" / "J". The "dotted
i" and the "undotted i" are two different letters used for two different
sounds, thus the distinction has to be made when writing the lower- and
upper-case letters.

The same holds true for the Ukrainian "regular i" and the "two-dot i":
different letters for different sounds.

Likewise, German "a" vs. "ä", "o" vs. "ö", and "u" vs. "ü" -- different
letters for different sounds.

[James Hogg]

You mean they're not just for decoration, like röck döts?

--
James

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Jämës Högg wrote:
>
> Reinhold {Rey} Aman wrote:

[...]

>> Likewise, German "a" vs. "ä", "o" vs. "ö", and "u" vs. "ü"
>> -- different letters for different sounds.
>
> You mean they're not just for decoration, like röck döts?
>

Häagen-Dazs & Mötley Crüe to you!

~~~ Rëïnhöld {Rëÿ} Ämän ~~~

[Pablo]

Peter Moylan escribió:

> Robert Bannister wrote:
>> On 8/02/12 7:44 PM, Pablo wrote:
>>> CT escribió:
>>>
>>>> Pablo wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Here in Europe, if you don't cross your seven, it's a one.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, but it wouldn't be needed if you didn't write your ones to look
>>>> like sevens in the first place.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Not me. I'm British. But the European 1 has a wotsit, yes. So it looks
>>> like
>>> a 7 to us.
>>>
>>
>> Moreover, its wotsit is clearly visible in the font I am viewing.
>
> I bet it doesn't dangle all the way down to the baseline, though.
>

I often see a one written as a narrow triangle (with no base). Uppercase A
is a wide triangle.

--
Pablo

[Richard Bollard]

I don't like numbers in emails for that reason. Queensland education
emails follow the format <initial><part of surname><number>@whatever
for example ksmi...@eq.edu.au would work for a Ken Smith. We get
these handwritten on competition entry forms and the number is often
ambiguous as you don't know if it is part of the surname or not.
Sometimes it is ksmit1@~ for the first K Smith so the length varies.
--
Richard Bollard
Canberra Australia

To email, I'm at AMT not spAMT.

[Robert Bannister]

On 9/02/12 7:57 AM, Peter Moylan wrote:
> Robert Bannister wrote:
>> On 8/02/12 7:44 PM, Pablo wrote:
>>> CT escribió:
>>>
>>>> Pablo wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Here in Europe, if you don't cross your seven, it's a one.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, but it wouldn't be needed if you didn't write your ones to look
>>>> like sevens in the first place.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Not me. I'm British. But the European 1 has a wotsit, yes. So it looks
>>> like
>>> a 7 to us.
>>>
>>
>> Moreover, its wotsit is clearly visible in the font I am viewing.
>
> I bet it doesn't dangle all the way down to the baseline, though.
>

Very true, although I always think of it as an upstroke rather than a
dangle. It's European fours that occasionally fool me.

--
Robert Bannister

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

The first email address I ever had had the string "2l" in it, where the
l was a letter, not a digit.


--
athel

[Mark Brader]

Robert Bannister:

>> My email address contains a figure one, and the only way I can
>> write so that people don't mistake it for an l or an I is by

>> adding a prominent serif...

Richard Bollard:

> I don't like numbers in emails for that reason. Queensland education
> emails follow the format <initial><part of surname><number>@whatever
> for example ksmi...@eq.edu.au would work for a Ken Smith. We get
> these handwritten on competition entry forms and the number is often

> ambiguous...

Login names on my present employer's system use a similar format, with
the initial coming after the partial surname, so I'm bradem2, for example.
But they avoid this problem by using 2 as the lowest number and counting
up from there. (After 9, they go to letters. I don't know what happens
after Z, although the company's big enough that the issue probably does
arise for some people.)

Email addresses on the system use the surname.firstname style instead.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto, m...@vex.net
"The recent explosion of tourism has ruined the
planet Arrakis for me forever." -- Spider Robinson

My text in this article is in the public domain.

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

My diagrams are models of true art you must agree,
And my handwriting is famous for its legibility.
Take a word like "minimum", to choose a random word.
For anyone to say he cannot read that is absurd.

Tom Lehrer, "The Professor's Song"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6it_kQeOnU

"Problem: Find the Fourier series".

--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |If a bus station is where a bus
SF Bay Area (1982-) |stops, and a train station is where
Chicago (1964-1982) |a train stops, what does that say
|about a workstation?
evan.kir...@gmail.com

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

[Duggy]

On Feb 10, 10:45 am, Richard Bollard <richa...@spamt.edu.au> wrote:
> I don't like numbers in emails for that reason.

I really, really don't like that use of "emails".

===
= DUG.
===

[Christian Weisgerber]

Peter Moylan <inv...@peter.pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

> > Not me. I'm British. But the European 1 has a wotsit, yes. So it looks like
> > a 7 to us.
> >

> That's a serious trap for the many Europeans who have migrated to
> Australia.

You'd imagine they'd be able to learn and adapt. But it's good to
know that I should use what I think of as American numerals also
in other parts of the English-speaking world.

> What is the bank supposed to do when a cheque says "fifteen
> dollars" in words but "$75" in numerals?

I don't know about Australian banks, but as far as I remember German
banks will honor the spelled out figure and ignore the numerals.

--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber na...@mips.inka.de

[John Varela]

On Wed, 8 Feb 2012 23:02:04 UTC, Peter Moylan
<inv...@peter.pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

> That's a serious trap for the many Europeans who have migrated to

> Australia. What is the bank supposed to do when a cheque says "fifteen
> dollars" in words but "$75" in numerals? Maybe that's one of the reasons
> cheques are now close to extinction.

As was discussed in another thread -- I think it was here on aue --
it's usual that no human looks at the check. The machine will read
$75 and pay $75.

--
John Varela

[John Varela]

On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 23:28:09 UTC, Duggy <Paul....@jcu.edu.au>
wrote:

> On Feb 10, 10:45 am, Richard Bollard <richa...@spamt.edu.au> wrote:
> > I don't like numbers in emails for that reason.
>
> I really, really don't like that use of "emails".

How come? Is it that you don't think "email" can be a noun?

--
John Varela

[Nick Spalding]

John Varela wrote, in <51W5y0sPNk52-pn2-KgN9JVZKUrXU@localhost>
on 11 Feb 2012 18:49:04 GMT:

I think that Duggy is referring to "email" being used as short for
"email address". I agree with him.
--
Nick Spalding
BrE/IrE

[Duggy]

On Feb 12, 7:42 am, Nick Spalding <spald...@iol.ie> wrote:
> John Varela wrote, in <51W5y0sPNk52-pn2-KgN9JVZKUrXU@localhost>
>  on 11 Feb 2012 18:49:04 GMT:
>

> >On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 23:28:09 UTC, Duggy <Paul.Dug...@jcu.edu.au>

> >wrote:
>
> >> On Feb 10, 10:45 am, Richard Bollard <richa...@spamt.edu.au> wrote:
> >> > I don't like numbers in emails for that reason.
>
> >> I really, really don't like that use of "emails".
>
> >How come? Is it that you don't think "email" can be a noun?
>
> I think that Duggy is referring to "email" being used as short for
> "email address".  I agree with him.

Exactly. Numbers in address is one thing, but a fear of number in
actual email?

===
= DUG.
===

[Robert Bannister]

Australian banks are quite satisfied with my crossed sevens and nines
that look a bit like lower case g, although it has been at least 25
years since I last wrote a cheque.

--
Robert Bannister

[John Varela]

On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 22:43:57 UTC, Duggy <Paul....@jcu.edu.au>
wrote:

In the "a usage puzzle" thread we find:

Duggy wrote:
> On Feb 11, 12:48 am, micky <NONONOmis...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>> Sender S has a small mailing list and sends emails once or twice
a
>> week. . 10 or 20 months into this arrangement, recipient R
emails
>> back to S taking issue with one of the emails.
>>
>> S emails all the R's, doesn't say what R's issue was, but says
that R
>> was upset about the email..
>>
>> What sex is R?
>>
>> Why do you pick that one?
>
> I don't like the "sends emails" usage. I know it's the accepted way
> to do things but it bugs me.

This example isn't talking about addresses. What was your objection
in this case?

--
John Varela

[Duggy]

On Feb 13, 10:45 am, "John Varela" <newla...@verizon.net> wrote:
> In the "a usage puzzle" thread we find:

> Duggy wrote:
> > On Feb 11, 12:48 am, micky <NONONOmis...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> >> Sender S has a small mailing list and sends emails once or twice
> a
> >> week. .  10 or 20 months into this arrangement, recipient R
> emails
> >> back to S taking issue with one of the emails.
>
> >> S emails all the R's, doesn't say what R's issue was, but says
> that R
> >> was upset about the email..
>
> >> What sex is R?
>
> >> Why do you pick that one?
>
> > I don't like the "sends emails" usage.  I know it's the accepted way
> > to do things but it bugs me.
>
> This example isn't talking about addresses.

Different thread, different issue.

> What was your objection
> in this case?

I feel that in that case "email" works better as the plural form than