[OT] You're (was: Re: [plug] n00b man Question)

[James Devenish]

In message <20040512074912.GA23486 at patrick.wattle.id.au>
on Wed, May 12, 2004 at 03:49:12PM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
> Hmm, there's a lot of redundancy in human language.  Seeing as
> everyone seemed to be able to understand everyone else here, I don't
> think that's a very good argument.

I have a feeling that you're deliberately trying to ensure the
continuance of this thread (judging by your previous statements
to that effect). I'll play along a little bit. With regards to
"everyone seemed to be able to" -- yes, you'll observe that I
never commented on the original passage until it was mentioned
by someone else. With regards to the poor writers and the people
who perpetually make non-typographic errors, I would refer you to
Onno's post: misspellings certainly do introduce ambiguities
and nonsenses, and can thwart the potential efficiency and
effectiveness of the written medium. (Although speech is more
tolerant, either performance or understanding suffer. It's all
relative, of course, and I am not suggesting that correct modern
English is the optimal language from the set of all possible
languages.)