Halfhazard work, Ivory League school : just-retired professor James Courter writes about the spelling habits of some of his students, the ones who would appear to do little reading: Teaching “Taco Bell’s Canon” (Wall Street Journal ).
Some of the more startling errors I’ve seen of late: and for an (from several writers), beast for best , retail for retell , scarface for sacrifice . The final item in this series might be the result of the Cupertino effect.
Related posts
No job too small
On “On the New Literacy”
(Thanks, Van Dyke.)
Friday, July 13, 2012
Taco Bell’s Canon
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
comments: 3
That is probably a factor, but I find it hard to relate it to "and" for "an." So the other factor is probably simple bad typing.
That is how we got "pwn."
This might be limited to me, but my fingers often type a word other than the one I intend. I had to correct the "but" in the first sentence from the inexplicable "by."
Cheers!
JzB
Any individual and for an could be a typo. But I’ve also seen on for an. And when I point out these things, the response is often a blank. I think these mistakes are new versions of of for have.
My other typing flaw is interchangeability of vowels. On for an is well within my ken; as are en, un and in.
Could I of done any worse?
Cheers!
JzB
Post a Comment