[SpamCop-List] Re: Rolex spam

[Mike Easter]

geo_splash_12 wrote:
> Mike Easter wrote:
>> geo_splash_12 wrote:

>>> Hey Mike, have you heard of Ejo's law?

>> What /is/ Ejo's law?

> It was posted on 11/11/04 around 3 am in this thread.

Well, I found the post;  I remember part of it now;  I didn't realize
that part of it addressed the same examples I just gave.  The source I
used and cited referred to the source you cited for the English
examples.  What I see there is an explanation of a Dutch 'problem' and
resolution, which is 'terrible' in terms of the English 'situation'.
The English situation is that the error of the apostrophe is rampant,
and it is not going to become 'OK' or correct simply because it is
rampant.

The fact that the Dutch usage you described is presumably 'correct' [and
not just 'popular' but incorrect like the English occurrence] and that
it is based partly on the 'evolution' of the language [the double o/s
going away] doesn't help things at all, because it implies that the
language evolution might make the persistent English misusages 'stick'.

I don't think you want to be calling what you were describing 'Ejo's
law'.  More like Ejo's observation of the Dutch apostrophe usage in some
plurals.

-- 
Mike Easter
kibitzer, not SC admin