1. Home
  2. Quilting Forum
  3. Errors in Patterns
  4. Page 2

Errors in Patterns

My friend, Judy Laquidera, has at least a half dozen people MAKE different sections of her quilts following her patterns. She has people with little experience and people with a lot of experience. I think it makes a big difference.

At least most of the errors aren't as bad as the one I read about last week where a whole printing of a cookbook had to be recalled and trashed.

If you don't know what I'm talking about just Google - Australian Cookbook recall. Should be the first hit. Kind of puts it all in perspective.

Cindy

Reply to
Teleflora
Loading thread data ...

I'm glad you mentioned that, Cindy. I enjoy reading and collecting cookbooks. Over the dead bodies of editors and absentminded cooks, I still continue to learn. However ! it seems cruel to me that so many of them leave the beginners - and that must include men who are 'suddenly single' - with left out ingredients and pitifully vague instructions. Polly

Reply to
Polly Esther

Our local privately produced town newsletter has got to the stage where people are counting the errors. The funniest ones are where the Editor has spell checked and not noticed that the computer has changed surnames. Sometimes the changes are somewhat appropriate, but probably not appreciated.

Sally at the Seaside ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~uk

formatting link

Ruby wrote:

Reply to
Sally Swindells

When I was editing the guild newsletter I once somehow missed that spell check had changed the last names in the minutes of the previous meeting. Oops! One of the funniest newspaper headline I've seen is from pre-spellcheck days; just before deer hunting season, the headline in the local paper was "Either Sex Dear Season Starts Saturday".

Julia > Our local privately produced town newsletter has got to the stage where

Reply to
Julia in MN

Reply to
Ruby

And one-up-man-ship! . In message , Jack Campin

- bogus address writes

Reply to
Pat S

^^^^ FEWER ;)

Rightly so.

I have sent back GCSE and A level course material from exam boards with grammatical errors and punctuation howlers. And 'less' rather than 'fewer'. (Sorry, but that one is a particular pain to me for some reason. Possibly because I first spotted and corrected it in the marking notes a teacher of mine put on my essay when I was at school, in what would now be year nine... It was NOT appreciated! But him going purple with rage and gobbling with frustration because he knew I was right was something I appreciated like crazy! Evil? Moi?)

Reply to
Kate XXXXXX

The OED says that "less" meaning the same as "fewer" has a clear ancestry from Anglo-Saxon. They give examples of it from perfectly respectable sources, and comment "now regarded as incorrect" - the implication was that THEY weren't the ones doing the regarding.

"Now" was March 1902 (that being when they published the part with "less" in) so this is one of the many constructions that has gone from normal to deviant (or deviant in the minds of pedants) and back again. There's nothing wrong with using it now.

Quirk, Greenbaum, Leech and Svartvik's "A Grammar of Contemporary English" (the fattest and funnest English grammar book ever) makes the same point - in effect "some people don't like it, but no comment from us".

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- e m a i l : j a c k @ c a m p i n . m e . u k Jack Campin, 11 Third Street, Newtongrange, Midlothian EH22 4PU, Scotland mobile 07800 739 557 Twitter: JackCampin

Reply to
Jack Campin - bogus address

InspirePoint website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.