BRHSLIST
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [BRHSlist] Spelling of Employe(e)s

To: BRHSlist@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [BRHSlist] Spelling of Employe(e)s
From: "John D. Mitchell, Jr." <cbqrr47@y...>
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 14:28:25 -0800 (PST)
In-reply-to: <B2B55731-1754-11D7-B8A0-00039376192E@e...>
Yes and oilfield goelogists all spell "tight" as
"tite". To do otherwise brands you a "weevil",( oil
patch for greenhorn).
John
--- William Barber <clipperw@E...> wrote:
> 
> Leo wrote:
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 10:46:31 EST
> > From: qutlx1@a...
> > Subject: Discipline
> >
> > In 1909 Second Vice President of the Q Daniel
> Willard issues a notice 
> > dated
> > May 1 that states "effective this date the
> practice of suspending from 
> > the
> > service employes(yes thats the correct spelling
> for time)in the train 
> > and
> > engine department ,because of the infraction of
> the rules,or for other
> > causes,will be discontinued".
> 
> The spelling of employees as "employes" was used by
> General Motors 
> officially until about 10 years ago. We were all
> taught to spell it 
> that way in company documents. Maybe other companies
> did it also. For 
> many years, the Chicago Tribune had their own form
> of contracted or 
> simpilfied spelling that they regularly promoted as
> an alternative to 
> standard accepted english spellings. I believe that
> Col. McCormmick was 
> a big proponent. Words like "light" became "lite" in
> the paper.
> 
> Bill Barber
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>