Thoughts with English riders

"Mike Rice" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 21:01:19 -0500, "Edward Dolan"
wrote:


There are innumerable dictionaries named "Oxford." I need to know the
publisher, the edition and the year of publication or copyright in order
to
identify your source. On the other hand I can give you my half dozen
dictionaries for sources if you are interested.

The fact is that equatable is not a word.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota




Hi Ed.

I find a reference to equatable he

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionar...able&x=13&y=12

although I am not about to sign up in order to run it down any more
completely.

A search of an on line thesaurus showed no matches.

I did waste a couple minutes, but the only other hits I got on
equatable were in GermanEnglish or some such. I didn't mark those
locations and don't want to spend the time to find them again.

So I guess it's not much of a word. Still I think it is close enough
to a word that we all (including you) understood it.

Indiana Mike found it all right. I do not see how I missed it. It is not
much of a word but still it is a word and I stand corrected. It is good to
see others here on ARBR who are "equally" concerned with me about the
proper usage of words.

I trulee understand your reaction to what appears to be an attempt at
making up a word. I have been led to believe only you are allowed this
privelige.

I do not ordinarily make a fuss about such things, but it will depend on who
is saying what to whom. In the case of Slugger, I always suspect the worse.
I understood the word perfectly but I wanted to score a cheap point against
someone whom I regard as an idiot. Apparently, he is not quite the idiot I
thought he was. The moral of this tempest in a teapot is never try to score
cheap points.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Not So Great - Minnesota

I do not ordinarily make a fuss about such things...

haha! good one eddie.

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Not So Great - Minnesota