I live in Leeds where there is lots of redevelopment going on in the city
centre. I was driving through the other day and got wondering "How do they
build them and get the crane cab and boom up there?" Do they use another
crane? If so how did they build that one, did they use another crane? If
so....... Do we have a chicken and egg situation here? I have never seen
one of these things erected, they just seem to appear overnight. Is it the
crane fairies job to put them there?

Cheers

John

"John" wrote in message
...
I live in Leeds where there is lots of redevelopment going on in the city
centre. I was driving through the other day and got wondering "How do they
build them and get the crane cab and boom up there?" Do they use another
crane? If so how did they build that one, did they use another crane? If
so....... Do we have a chicken and egg situation here? I have never seen
one of these things erected, they just seem to appear overnight. Is it the
crane fairies job to put them there?


It builds itself, pulling up a section and slotting it in beneath, pushing
itself upwards
clever stuff, google for it I'm sure theres something out there about it.
--
Vass

In article , John
writes
I live in Leeds where there is lots of redevelopment going on in the city
centre. I was driving through the other day and got wondering "How do they
build them and get the crane cab and boom up there?" Do they use another
crane? If so how did they build that one, did they use another crane? If
so....... Do we have a chicken and egg situation here? I have never seen
one of these things erected, they just seem to appear overnight. Is it the
crane fairies job to put them there?

I'm sorry to disappoint you but there are no fairies involved. They just
use a large mobile crane.
--
Tim Mitchell

"John" wrote in message
...
I live in Leeds where there is lots of redevelopment going on in the city
centre. I was driving through the other day and got wondering "How do they
build them and get the crane cab and boom up there?" Do they use another
crane? If so how did they build that one, did they use another crane? If
so....... Do we have a chicken and egg situation here? I have never seen
one of these things erected, they just seem to appear overnight. Is it the
crane fairies job to put them there?

http://science.howstuffworks.com/tower-crane4.htm

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 11:34:06 +0000 (UTC), "John"
wrote:

I live in Leeds where there is lots of redevelopment going on in the city
centre. I was driving through the other day and got wondering "How do they
build them and get the crane cab and boom up there?" Do they use another
crane? If so how did they build that one, did they use another crane? If
so....... Do we have a chicken and egg situation here? I have never seen
one of these things erected, they just seem to appear overnight. Is it the
crane fairies job to put them there?

Cheers

John


They build the top bit neer the ground, with another crane. The bottom
section of the upright has hydrolics, and jacks the whole lot up, a
new section is inserted, crane is now 20 foot higher. repeat untill
crane is desired height.

Rick

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 12:47:58 +0100, Tim Mitchell
wrote:

In article , John
writes
I live in Leeds where there is lots of redevelopment going on in the city
centre. I was driving through the other day and got wondering "How do they
build them and get the crane cab and boom up there?" Do they use another
crane? If so how did they build that one, did they use another crane? If
so....... Do we have a chicken and egg situation here? I have never seen
one of these things erected, they just seem to appear overnight. Is it the
crane fairies job to put them there?

I'm sorry to disappoint you but there are no fairies involved. They just
use a large mobile crane.

I think the OP is looking at the cranes 100's of feet tall.......

Rick wrote:

They build the top bit neer the ground, with another crane.

So how did they build the that crane?

:¬)

--
http://gymratz.co.uk - Best Gym Equipment & Bodybuilding Supplements UK.
http://trade-price-supplements.co.uk - TRADE PRICED SUPPLEMENTS for ALL!
http://fitness-equipment-uk.com - UK's No.1 Fitness Equipment Suppliers.
http://gymratz.co.uk/hot-seat.htm - Live web-cam! (sometimes)

In article , Rick
writes
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 12:47:58 +0100, Tim Mitchell
wrote:

In article , John
writes
I live in Leeds where there is lots of redevelopment going on in the city
centre. I was driving through the other day and got wondering "How do they
build them and get the crane cab and boom up there?" Do they use another
crane? If so how did they build that one, did they use another crane? If
so....... Do we have a chicken and egg situation here? I have never seen
one of these things erected, they just seem to appear overnight. Is it the
crane fairies job to put them there?

I'm sorry to disappoint you but there are no fairies involved. They just
use a large mobile crane.

I think the OP is looking at the cranes 100's of feet tall.......

I read the link someone else posted and realised that ... I have seen
one built with a mobile crane though, but presumably only up to a
certain height.
--
Tim Mitchell

John

This all depends on the type of crane you are seeing!
If these appear as a letter T on the horizon comprised of lattice
consruction sections, they are known as tower cranes. As other posters
point out these actually "self erect".
Incidentally the top horizontal member of the T is left to free pivot when
the crane is not in use so that it acts as a wind direction indicator. This
is so that the top of the crane presents the minimum wind area when idle.
Also you will see a counter weight on the end of the T horizontal (opposited
end to the hook). This increases the lift capacity by counterbalancing the
lifted load and reducing the nett overturning moment. On the more
sophisticated cranes I believe the position of this weight is adjustable.

If you are talking mobile cranes with lattice construction booms/jibs which
pivot at the base, then the larger versions of these do indeed need smaller
cranes or fork lifts for assembly. Basically the boom is assembled in the
horizontal and the rigging fitted and used to raise the boom to operating
angle.

Phil

Rick wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 11:34:06 +0000 (UTC), "John"
wrote:

I live in Leeds where there is lots of redevelopment going on in the city
centre. I was driving through the other day and got wondering "How do they
build them and get the crane cab and boom up there?" Do they use another
crane? If so how did they build that one, did they use another crane? If
so....... Do we have a chicken and egg situation here? I have never seen
one of these things erected, they just seem to appear overnight. Is it the
crane fairies job to put them there?

Cheers

John


They build the top bit neer the ground, with another crane. The bottom
section of the upright has hydrolics, and jacks the whole lot up, a
new section is inserted, crane is now 20 foot higher. repeat untill
crane is desired height.

Rick

But once the development is finished, what happens if there is no clear
space to reverse the process? The jib must be detachable in some way?

MBQ

wrote in message
ups.com...


Rick wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 11:34:06 +0000 (UTC), "John"
wrote:

I live in Leeds where there is lots of redevelopment going on in the
city
centre. I was driving through the other day and got wondering "How do
they
build them and get the crane cab and boom up there?" Do they use
another
crane? If so how did they build that one, did they use another crane?
If
so....... Do we have a chicken and egg situation here? I have never
seen
one of these things erected, they just seem to appear overnight. Is it
the
crane fairies job to put them there?

Cheers

John


They build the top bit neer the ground, with another crane. The bottom
section of the upright has hydrolics, and jacks the whole lot up, a
new section is inserted, crane is now 20 foot higher. repeat untill
crane is desired height.

Rick

But once the development is finished, what happens if there is no clear
space to reverse the process? The jib must be detachable in some way?

They reverse the process. Room to do this is one of the things they take
into consideration before building it.

If they didn't do that, they'd find themselves in the same position as the
legendary biker who took all the components of his motorcycle upstairs to
his room where it was warmer to work. Built the bike and then had a little
trouble with the bend in the stairs. :-))

Steve

"Vass" wrote in message
...

"John" wrote in message
...
I live in Leeds where there is lots of redevelopment going on in the city
centre. I was driving through the other day and got wondering "How do
they build them and get the crane cab and boom up there?" Do they use
another crane? If so how did they build that one, did they use another
crane? If so....... Do we have a chicken and egg situation here? I have
never seen one of these things erected, they just seem to appear
overnight. Is it the crane fairies job to put them there?


It builds itself, pulling up a section and slotting it in beneath, pushing
itself upwards
clever stuff, google for it I'm sure theres something out there about it.
--
Vass


#1: One of the Sat-Cable Channels shows these being self-erected
frequently - 'Amazing/Big/Monster Machines/Engineering ' or
some such. One programme actually showed a _building_ in
Sweden which was a 'jack-it-up' construction; central core
with stair-case- service ducts etc; lay floor 'segments'; place
re-bar pump concrete; when set - remove petals, add next storey's
inner core moulds, pour concrete; when set - remove moulds;
add next floor petals ... repeat ... repeat.

#2: spoke to an industrial electrician (not Part P) and he said
he _looks_ for cityscape with lots of tower cranes; - there's
jobbing opportunities for carpenters, electricians, plumbers
at the base of each of them.

--

Brian

On 27 Jun 2005 06:02:13 -0700, wrote:



Rick wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 11:34:06 +0000 (UTC), "John"
wrote:

I live in Leeds where there is lots of redevelopment going on in the city
centre. I was driving through the other day and got wondering "How do they
build them and get the crane cab and boom up there?" Do they use another
crane? If so how did they build that one, did they use another crane? If
so....... Do we have a chicken and egg situation here? I have never seen
one of these things erected, they just seem to appear overnight. Is it the
crane fairies job to put them there?

Cheers

John


They build the top bit neer the ground, with another crane. The bottom
section of the upright has hydrolics, and jacks the whole lot up, a
new section is inserted, crane is now 20 foot higher. repeat untill
crane is desired height.

Rick

But once the development is finished, what happens if there is no clear
space to reverse the process? The jib must be detachable in some way?

MBQ

The revers process, I guess you work this out before you build,
especially with the cranes that end up being in the lift shaft of the
building. Some buildings end up with a small crane on the top,
presuably it can help remove the big one.

You could of couce call in "Controlled Demolition" to blow it down.

Rick

"John" wrote in message
...
I live in Leeds where there is lots of redevelopment going on in the city
centre. I was driving through the other day and got wondering "How do they
build them and get the crane cab and boom up there?" Do they use another
crane? If so how did they build that one, did they use another crane? If
so....... Do we have a chicken and egg situation here? I have never seen
one of these things erected, they just seem to appear overnight. Is it the
crane fairies job to put them there?

I've wondered the same. Spouse explained it to me. Then I forgot :-(

Mary in Leeds

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:56:56 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


"John" wrote in message
...
I live in Leeds where there is lots of redevelopment going on in the city
centre. I was driving through the other day and got wondering "How do they
build them and get the crane cab and boom up there?" Do they use another
crane? If so how did they build that one, did they use another crane? If
so....... Do we have a chicken and egg situation here? I have never seen
one of these things erected, they just seem to appear overnight. Is it the
crane fairies job to put them there?

I've wondered the same. Spouse explained it to me. Then I forgot :-(

Mary in Leeds

The Einstien Approach, insted of remebering lots of stuff, you simply
make your brain an index into the archives of world knowledge.

Einstien would use the phone book to find his own phone number.

Rick

In uk.d-i-y, Rick wrote:
Einstien would use the phone book to find his own phone number.

Ah, but could he *spell* his own name?

--
Mike Barnes

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 16:39:01 +0100, Mike Barnes
wrote:

In uk.d-i-y, Rick wrote:
Einstien would use the phone book to find his own phone number.

Ah, but could he *spell* his own name?

Do you point and laugh at wheelchair users, as well as take the ****
out of dsylexics ?

Rick

In uk.d-i-y, Rick wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 16:39:01 +0100, Mike Barnes
wrote:

In uk.d-i-y, Rick wrote:
Einstien would use the phone book to find his own phone number.

Ah, but could he *spell* his own name?

Do you point and laugh at wheelchair users, as well as take the ****
out of dsylexics ?

No offence meant, and I apologise if any was taken. You must admit it
was a gift...

--
Mike Barnes

Rick wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 16:39:01 +0100, Mike Barnes
wrote:

In uk.d-i-y, Rick wrote:
Einstien would use the phone book to find his own phone number.

Ah, but could he *spell* his own name?

Do you point and laugh at wheelchair users, as well as take the
**** out of dsylexics ?

Slightly unfair, Rick. How is another poster to know this?

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 16:23:45 UTC, Rick wrote:

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 16:39:01 +0100, Mike Barnes
wrote:

In uk.d-i-y, Rick wrote:
Einstien would use the phone book to find his own phone number.

Ah, but could he *spell* his own name?

Do you point and laugh at wheelchair users, as well as take the ****
out of dsylexics ?

Not everyone who can't spell is dyslexic. And dyslexia is often about
more than just spelling problems.

"Rick" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:56:56 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


I have never seen
one of these things erected, they just seem to appear overnight. Is it
the
crane fairies job to put them there?

I've wondered the same. Spouse explained it to me. Then I forgot :-(

Mary in Leeds

The Einstien Approach, insted of remebering lots of stuff, you simply
make your brain an index into the archives of world knowledge.

S'right. I now know that if I need to know about cranes, Spouse will know.
Encarta? Forget it.

But John was right, they do spring up overnight, like mushroms. The Leeds
Look depends on the Leeds Cranes.

Einstien would use the phone book to find his own phone number.

And that was before mobiles!

Mary

Rick

"Mike Barnes" wrote in message
...
In uk.d-i-y, Rick wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 16:39:01 +0100, Mike Barnes
wrote:

In uk.d-i-y, Rick wrote:
Einstien would use the phone book to find his own phone number.

Ah, but could he *spell* his own name?

Do you point and laugh at wheelchair users, as well as take the ****
out of dsylexics ?

No offence meant, and I apologise if any was taken. You must admit it
was a gift...

True. Like Spellcheckers.

Mary

--
Mike Barnes

Mike Barnes wrote:
Rick wrote:
Einstien would use the phone book to find his own phone number.
Ah, but could he *spell* his own name?

Shakespeare couldn't.

Owain

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
. net...

"Mike Barnes" wrote in message
...
In uk.d-i-y, Rick wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 16:39:01 +0100, Mike Barnes
wrote:

In uk.d-i-y, Rick wrote:
Einstien would use the phone book to find his own phone number.

Ah, but could he *spell* his own name?

Do you point and laugh at wheelchair users, as well as take the ****
out of dsylexics ?

No offence meant, and I apologise if any was taken. You must admit it
was a gift...

True. Like Spellcheckers.

Mary

--
Mike Barnes


In an essay a student once wrote for me Einstein was spelt six different
ways on one page. Now that takes pure genius!

Lawrence

"Lawrence Milbourn" wrote in message
...



In an essay a student once wrote for me Einstein was spelt six different
ways on one page. Now that takes pure genius!

What mark did you award?

Mary

Lawrence

"Owain" wrote in message
...
Mike Barnes wrote:
Rick wrote:
Einstien would use the phone book to find his own phone number.
Ah, but could he *spell* his own name?

Shakespeare couldn't.

He could. In his day there was no standard spelling.

Mary

Owain

Mike Barnes wrote:

In uk.d-i-y, Rick wrote:

Einstien would use the phone book to find his own phone number.


Ah, but could he *spell* his own name?

IIRC he *was* dyslexic...


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Owain wrote:

Mike Barnes wrote:

Rick wrote:

Einstien would use the phone book to find his own phone number.

Ah, but could he *spell* his own name?


Shakespeare couldn't.

If he couldn't, are you sure that you can ;-)


Dave

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 19:49:14 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


"Mike Barnes" wrote in message
d...
In uk.d-i-y, Rick wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 16:39:01 +0100, Mike Barnes
wrote:

In uk.d-i-y, Rick wrote:
Einstien would use the phone book to find his own phone number.

Ah, but could he *spell* his own name?

Do you point and laugh at wheelchair users, as well as take the ****
out of dsylexics ?

No offence meant, and I apologise if any was taken. You must admit it
was a gift...

True. Like Spellcheckers.

Feeling for Rick re not being a good speller (and not having a spell
checker on FreeAgent) I'll say something (to Mary) that might make
some realise how unkind (however innocent) having a pop when we spell
'difficult' words incorrectly (simple incorrect words are often just
typos)? (And I note Mike said sorry etc)

I did ask Mary if there were any free spell checkers that I could
easily use with Free Agent and you forgot to tell me (ha ha) .... ?

Now an answer to your memory loss could be using an aid memoir (like
us having to use a spell checker)? Do we have a go when you forget
something .. do we think you are doing it on purpose .. no ?

I am 48 years old and *still* spell some (often the same) words
incorectly .. but as long as I do my best to use capitals and a bit of
formatting / punctuation and everyone can understand the spirit of the
message does it *really* matter?

I would love to be able to spell everything correctly (even if only to
get the pedants off my back) but I just can't (English being so messed
up .. "I before E except after C" .. yeah right ..), even when I use
the spell checkers that come in some apps, I can't even get the spell
checker to understand what I'm trying to write (and have to use
another word instead)!

*I'm* not having a pop at anyone (especially Mary even though she's
pulled me up re spellings several times) just a plea to those who find
spelling 'easy' do the bigger thing and just read our posts for what
they mean, not how they are spelled (spelt?) ..... ;-(

All the best ..

T i m

p.s. When I was a lad I helped build a smal 'tower crane' .. they just
built it using a mobile crane and didn't bother with the self
errecting mech (it only needed to be a certian (sp?) height. I had the
fun job of:

1) Wiring it up (all the paperwork was in French)

2) Setting the overload trip up at the top .. as they bounced a 1
tonne weight hanging off the jib ... !

"T i m" wrote in message
...

In uk.d-i-y, Rick wrote:
Einstien would use the phone book to find his own phone number.

Ah, but could he *spell* his own name?

Do you point and laugh at wheelchair users, as well as take the ****
out of dsylexics ?

No offence meant, and I apologise if any was taken. You must admit it
was a gift...

True. Like Spellcheckers.

Feeling for Rick re not being a good speller (and not having a spell
checker on FreeAgent) I'll say something (to Mary) that might make
some realise how unkind (however innocent) having a pop when we spell
'difficult' words incorrectly (simple incorrect words are often just
typos)? (And I note Mike said sorry etc)

I did ask Mary if there were any free spell checkers that I could
easily use with Free Agent and you forgot to tell me (ha ha) .... ?

I just don't know :-)

Now an answer to your memory loss could be using an aid memoir (like
us having to use a spell checker)? Do we have a go when you forget
something

Some do, very often :-)

.. do we think you are doing it on purpose .. no ?

How do I know the intention of others? Unlike many people, who seem to think
that they know *my* intentions, I don't have such a skill :-)

I am 48 years old and *still* spell some (often the same) words
incorectly .. but as long as I do my best to use capitals and a bit of
formatting / punctuation and everyone can understand the spirit of the
message does it *really* matter?

If a person - anyone - wants to communicate effectively I think it does
matter. If the flow of the message is interrupted by a solecism of any kind
then it does matter. It could be argued that a writer who hasn't the
courtesy to bother to check spelling is insulting the reader.

I liken this to how people behave in other parts of their lives. For
instance, do you bother washing? Does it matter if you smell? Many women
wouldn't go out without applying make-up, yet when they open their
beautifully painted mouths the inarticulate noises which emanate therefrom
belie the care they've given to the rest of what they present to the world.

I would love to be able to spell everything correctly (even if only to
get the pedants off my back) but I just can't (English being so messed
up .. "I before E except after C" .. yeah right ..),

English is perhaps the richest language in the world, it is expressive and
there is usually a variety of words which can be used for the same idea,
nobody has to be stuck. Other languages tend to be more rigid, you could
say that they are 'easier', our nuances do make English more versatile.

If you have a piece of timber which you want to convert into a shelf but you
can't be bothered to use the right tools or measure properly are you
satisfied with second best? Is the piece of wood messed up or are you not
working it appropriately?

even when I use
the spell checkers that come in some apps, I can't even get the spell
checker to understand what I'm trying to write (and have to use
another word instead)!

That's a great benefit of English. OE's spellchecker is very good and you
can also make it do what you want.

You could work at it - if you think it matters enough. If you can't be
bothered it doesn't matter. You just won't have the same impact as if you do
bother. Rules of language can be likened to other rules, social or legal.
There are rules about crossing the road. Does it matter if you can't be
bothered looking to see if something's going to hit you?

*I'm* not having a pop at anyone (especially Mary even though she's
pulled me up re spellings several times) just a plea to those who find
spelling 'easy' do the bigger thing and just read our posts for what
they mean, not how they are spelled (spelt?) ..... ;-(

If you had a pop at me it wouldn't make any difference to me, my integrity
is intact, don't worry about it. But it seems that you want others to do the
work which you can't be bothered to do in the first place. The many have to
compensate for the few. Is that fair?

Hmm.

I'm not sure about spelling being 'easy' for anyone. It has to be worked at
just as other things, which are worthwhile, have to be worked at.

By the way, I didn't correct the poster's spelling of Einstein.

:-)

Mary

In uk.d-i-y, T i m wrote:
I'll say something (to Mary) that might make
some realise how unkind (however innocent) having a pop when we spell
'difficult' words incorrectly (simple incorrect words are often just
typos)? (And I note Mike said sorry etc)

Please understand that I wasn't "having a pop" at Rick. If I'd
criticised him in any way, that would be different, but I didn't. I used
his posting as a vehicle for humour. I think that's acceptable, bearing
in mind that *anything* that one person regards as humorous could be
regarded as offensive by someone else. Humour's like that.

I have no idea whether Rick is dyslexic or not. I assumed that his
mistake was a typo, and I have seen nothing that makes me think
otherwise. There are all sorts of reasons, which I have no wish to know
about, why he might find a spelling joke offensive at this time.

If we were inhibited from taking the humorous opportunities presented by
typos, Usenet would be a much poorer place.

--
Mike Barnes

Mary Fisher wrote:
snip various comments about using english

If a person - anyone - wants to communicate effectively I think it does
matter. If the flow of the message is interrupted by a solecism of any kind
then it does matter. It could be argued that a writer who hasn't the
courtesy to bother to check spelling is insulting the reader.

I liken this to how people behave in other parts of their lives. For
instance, do you bother washing? Does it matter if you smell? Many women
wouldn't go out without applying make-up, yet when they open their
beautifully painted mouths the inarticulate noises which emanate therefrom
belie the care they've given to the rest of what they present to the world.

applause

It's all part of the anti-intellectual attitude that pervades this
country. It drives me mad. People seem to be actually scared that
they wont look 'cool' (or whatever the current equivalent is - phat or
bad or rad or something similar), if they are seen to think too much.

It's like associating cause and effect is a weakness. Expressing
yourself clearly makes you a 'boffin' (or whatever the current
equivalent is).

My personal list of awful thigns people say is topped by 'sort of',
'kind of' and 'like' used to indicate a non-commital nature. e.g. It's
sort of like kind of a good idea if you sort of brush your teeth
because like it's kind of like cleaning them you know and it's kind of
like a good thing. (subtext - please don't hate me for wanting to do
something sensible).

Having said all that I do think that life is too short to proof read
usenet.


--

Steve F

"Mike Barnes" wrote in message
...
In uk.d-i-y, T i m wrote:
I'll say something (to Mary) that might make
some realise how unkind (however innocent) having a pop when we spell
'difficult' words incorrectly (simple incorrect words are often just
typos)? (And I note Mike said sorry etc)

Please understand that I wasn't "having a pop" at Rick.

I didn't think you were :-)

If I'd
criticised him in any way, that would be different, but I didn't. I used
his posting as a vehicle for humour. I think that's acceptable, bearing
in mind that *anything* that one person regards as humorous could be
regarded as offensive by someone else. Humour's like that.

nod

I have no idea whether Rick is dyslexic or not. I assumed that his
mistake was a typo, and I have seen nothing that makes me think
otherwise. There are all sorts of reasons, which I have no wish to know
about, why he might find a spelling joke offensive at this time.

If we were inhibited from taking the humorous opportunities presented by
typos, Usenet would be a much poorer place.

Indeed.

Mary

Mary Fisher wrote:

You could work at it - if you think it matters enough. If you can't be

Frankly Mary, I that that is rather insulting. What do you suppose we
(dyslexics) have been doing for the bulk of our lives?

Would you say to a one legged man, "learn to walk properly"? Yes there
are steps (g) that can be taken to improve the situation, but you will
also have to accept that is may be something they will never do as well
as you.

bothered it doesn't matter. You just won't have the same impact as if you do
bother. Rules of language can be likened to other rules, social or legal.

I wish it was simply a case of "bothering".

Yes, I agree you will have more impact on some readers if you can spell
faultlessly, although poor grammar is perhaps more noticeable than poor
spelling.

There are rules about crossing the road. Does it matter if you can't be
bothered looking to see if something's going to hit you?

One of the fundamental difficulties with a dyslexic's brain wiring is an
inability to recognise and apply the rules. This in many cases results
in the dyslexic having to either learn each word as a special case (much
as you would learn a telephone number), or fall back on the "logical"
approach of spelling phonetically. Alas with the aforementioned richness
of our language that will result in an far less than perfect result.

If you had a pop at me it wouldn't make any difference to me, my integrity
is intact, don't worry about it. But it seems that you want others to do the
work which you can't be bothered to do in the first place. The many have to
compensate for the few. Is that fair?

I am surprised that someone of your abilities should have so much
difficulty coping with the occasional typo or incorrect spelling.
Especially when you are reading a coherent and well constructed sentence.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 09:45:44 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


If a person - anyone - wants to communicate effectively I think it does
matter. If the flow of the message is interrupted by a solecism of any kind
then it does matter. It could be argued that a writer who hasn't the
courtesy to bother to check spelling is insulting the reader.

Oh to live in utopia Mary .. ? It will be "no one over 6' or bald"
soon (that's me out on both counts!) ;-)

I liken this to how people behave in other parts of their lives. For
instance, do you bother washing?

Yes.

Does it matter if you smell?

'Matter' is a function of where you are and what you are doing .. in
the real world what do you expect a workman digging a hole in the
ground in the 80 deg sun to do? Stop every 5 mins for a wash? So, it
might 'matter' if the observer is inflexible? As mentioned elsewhere,
it's often not just a matter of trying harder .. is just how different
folk 'see' stuff. What if they have a body odour 'problem' no matter
how many times a day they wash / spray / roll .. would you tell them
they stink?

Many women
wouldn't go out without applying make-up, yet when they open their
beautifully painted mouths the inarticulate noises which emanate therefrom
belie the care they've given to the rest of what they present to the world.

And you would judge them so Mary? Could it be possible that these folk
could actually be 'better' citizens than some you would find more
'acceptable' because of how they sound?

I would love to be able to spell everything correctly (even if only to
get the pedants off my back) but I just can't (English being so messed
up .. "I before E except after C" .. yeah right ..),

English is perhaps the richest language in the world, it is expressive and
there is usually a variety of words which can be used for the same idea,
nobody has to be stuck.

Try telling someone learing English that though? My 15 year old
daughter was recently helping her 15 year old boyfriend (gently and
because he asked) about "their" and "there" etc. After she explained
*why* there were differences and what they meant he was much happier
(he 'understood'). Why hadn't anyone else (school) managed to deal
with this 'hole' in his understanding before now?

Other languages tend to be more rigid, you could
say that they are 'easier', our nuances do make English more versatile.

Possibly, but that wasn't the 'issue'.

If you have a piece of timber which you want to convert into a shelf but you
can't be bothered to use the right tools or measure properly are you
satisfied with second best? Is the piece of wood messed up or are you not
working it appropriately?

Or put another way, what if you are actually doing the best you can
(reasonably) do with the tools you are given? We have one life to get
though and most of us choose to do a variety of things to the best of
our ability. I'm not saying we should close our eyes to things but
sometimes you walk into stuff even with your eyes fully open?

even when I use
the spell checkers that come in some apps, I can't even get the spell
checker to understand what I'm trying to write (and have to use
another word instead)!

That's a great benefit of English. OE's spellchecker is very good and you
can also make it do what you want.

Possibly (don't use OE) .. and I do use spell checkers where they are
offered .. Free Agent hasn't one so I can't use it. I have tried some
'external' ones that you can call up into any app but none have worked
well enough (I was going to say "have been sucessfull" but I knew
there was no chance of getting that right!) ;-)

You could work at it - if you think it matters enough. If you can't be
bothered it doesn't matter. You just won't have the same impact as if you do
bother.

With *some* possibly. But if I think someone has something valid /
informed / interesting to offer I try to see though any minor issues
(like difficult spelling or 'blind spots' (like a mate that always
types teh for 'the' ..) and appreciate the good stuff?

Rules of language can be likened to other rules, social or legal.
There are rules about crossing the road. Does it matter if you can't be
bothered looking to see if something's going to hit you?

I can't see a valid comparison (re spelling) Mary? ;-(

*I'm* not having a pop at anyone (especially Mary even though she's
pulled me up re spellings several times) just a plea to those who find
spelling 'easy' do the bigger thing and just read our posts for what
they mean, not how they are spelled (spelt?) ..... ;-(

If you had a pop at me it wouldn't make any difference to me, my integrity
is intact, don't worry about it. But it seems that you want others to do the
work which you can't be bothered to do in the first place.

That's making a huge assumption though isn't it Mary? You have no idea
how much time I may put into typing, editing and proof reading
something I send? You have to understand that some of us can read and
re-read some incorrect spelling and not see anything wrong?

The many have to
compensate for the few. Is that fair?

If this was uk.english.perfect then possibly no, but it isn't .. it's
a newsgroup for folk to exchange information regarding DIY (or bees or
whatever) ;-)

Hmm.

I'm not sure about spelling being 'easy' for anyone. It has to be worked at
just as other things, which are worthwhile, have to be worked at.

But as you know all too well everthing has prioraties (I tried but
have no idea if I'm even close). I suggest someone on this list with
water pouring down the stairs would rather have an informative reply
written all in lower case, with no punctuation and poor spelling than
no answer at all?

By the way, I didn't correct the poster's spelling of Einstein.

Did I suggest you did? Maybe I missunderstood the spirit of your
comment ..

"Mike: No offence meant, and I apologise if any was taken. You must
admit it was a gift...

Mary: True. Like Spellcheckers."

For my crude inderstanding of this flexible language of ours I took
that to suggest that 'posters' could use a spellchecker because they
were 'there' or freely available (was I close)? ;-)

Bottom line, I don't like hearing folk saying 'we was' or 'anythink'
but wouldn't assume to correct them .. (unless we were in an English
class and I was the teacher of course) ;-) [1]

All the best .. (really)

T i m

[1] Or my daughter says it .. and at 15 she's a better speller than me
(I?) .. possibly because she 'likes' English as a subject and had read
more books when she was 5 than I have to date.

I have read this though the best I can but have to go out now to help
a mate with a PC problem (where thank's to GUi's poor spellers aren't
penalised) ;-)

"John Rumm" wrote in message
...
Mary Fisher wrote:

You could work at it - if you think it matters enough. If you can't be

Frankly Mary, I that that is rather insulting. What do you suppose we
(dyslexics) have been doing for the bulk of our lives?

I didn't mention dyslexics. I think you're being over-sensitive. I was
replying to Tim, who hasn't claimed to be dyslexic.


bothered it doesn't matter. You just won't have the same impact as if you
do bother. Rules of language can be likened to other rules, social or
legal.

I wish it was simply a case of "bothering".

See above.

Yes, I agree you will have more impact on some readers if you can spell
faultlessly, although poor grammar is perhaps more noticeable than poor
spelling.

That's your opinion..

There are rules about crossing the road. Does it matter if you can't be
bothered looking to see if something's going to hit you?

One of the fundamental difficulties with a dyslexic's brain wiring is an
inability to recognise and apply the rules. This in many cases results in
the dyslexic having to either learn each word as a special case (much as
you would learn a telephone number), or fall back on the "logical"
approach of spelling phonetically. Alas with the aforementioned richness
of our language that will result in an far less than perfect result.

See above.

If you had a pop at me it wouldn't make any difference to me, my
integrity is intact, don't worry about it. But it seems that you want
others to do the work which you can't be bothered to do in the first
place. The many have to compensate for the few. Is that fair?

I am surprised that someone of your abilities should have so much
difficulty coping with the occasional typo or incorrect spelling.
Especially when you are reading a coherent and well constructed sentence.

er- to WHAT sentence are you referring?

Mary


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 09:45:44 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


If a person - anyone - wants to communicate effectively I think it does
matter. If the flow of the message is interrupted by a solecism of any
kind
then it does matter. It could be argued that a writer who hasn't the
courtesy to bother to check spelling is insulting the reader.

Oh to live in utopia Mary .. ? It will be "no one over 6' or bald"
soon (that's me out on both counts!) ;-)

I liken this to how people behave in other parts of their lives. For
instance, do you bother washing?

Yes.

Does it matter if you smell?

'Matter' is a function of where you are and what you are doing .. in
the real world what do you expect a workman digging a hole in the
ground in the 80 deg sun to do? Stop every 5 mins for a wash? So, it
might 'matter' if the observer is inflexible? As mentioned elsewhere,
it's often not just a matter of trying harder .. is just how different
folk 'see' stuff. What if they have a body odour 'problem' no matter
how many times a day they wash / spray / roll .. would you tell them
they stink?

Are you suggesting that someone who can't be bothered to spell is digging a
hole at 80 degrees?

Many women
wouldn't go out without applying make-up, yet when they open their
beautifully painted mouths the inarticulate noises which emanate therefrom
belie the care they've given to the rest of what they present to the
world.

And you would judge them so Mary? Could it be possible that these folk
could actually be 'better' citizens than some you would find more
'acceptable' because of how they sound?

What I'm saying is that they care about how they look but not about how they
communicate. Fine feathers and all that ...

I would love to be able to spell everything correctly (even if only to
get the pedants off my back) but I just can't (English being so messed
up .. "I before E except after C" .. yeah right ..),

English is perhaps the richest language in the world, it is expressive and
there is usually a variety of words which can be used for the same idea,
nobody has to be stuck.

Try telling someone learing English that though?

Are you learning English?

My 15 year old
daughter was recently helping her 15 year old boyfriend (gently and
because he asked) about "their" and "there" etc. After she explained
*why* there were differences and what they meant he was much happier
(he 'understood'). Why hadn't anyone else (school) managed to deal
with this 'hole' in his understanding before now?

I've no idea. I wasn't responsible for his education.

Other languages tend to be more rigid, you could
say that they are 'easier', our nuances do make English more versatile.

Possibly, but that wasn't the 'issue'.

You made it an issue by talking about English being 'messed up'.

If you have a piece of timber which you want to convert into a shelf but
you
can't be bothered to use the right tools or measure properly are you
satisfied with second best? Is the piece of wood messed up or are you not
working it appropriately?

Or put another way, what if you are actually doing the best you can
(reasonably) do with the tools you are given? We have one life to get
though and most of us choose to do a variety of things to the best of
our ability. I'm not saying we should close our eyes to things but
sometimes you walk into stuff even with your eyes fully open?

I don't understand the correlation.

even when I use
the spell checkers that come in some apps, I can't even get the spell
checker to understand what I'm trying to write (and have to use
another word instead)!

That's a great benefit of English. OE's spellchecker is very good and you
can also make it do what you want.

Possibly (don't use OE)

Try it.


You could work at it - if you think it matters enough. If you can't be
bothered it doesn't matter. You just won't have the same impact as if you
do
bother.

With *some* possibly. But if I think someone has something valid /
informed / interesting to offer I try to see though any minor issues
(like difficult spelling or 'blind spots' (like a mate that always
types teh for 'the' ..) and appreciate the good stuff?

I do - but it interferes with the communication of the message and it's not
necessary.

Rules of language can be likened to other rules, social or legal.
There are rules about crossing the road. Does it matter if you can't be
bothered looking to see if something's going to hit you?

I can't see a valid comparison (re spelling) Mary? ;-(

If you can't see that I haven't communicated well enough. I rest my case.

*I'm* not having a pop at anyone (especially Mary even though she's
pulled me up re spellings several times) just a plea to those who find
spelling 'easy' do the bigger thing and just read our posts for what
they mean, not how they are spelled (spelt?) ..... ;-(

If you had a pop at me it wouldn't make any difference to me, my integrity
is intact, don't worry about it. But it seems that you want others to do
the
work which you can't be bothered to do in the first place.

That's making a huge assumption though isn't it Mary? You have no idea
how much time I may put into typing, editing and proof reading
something I send? You have to understand that some of us can read and
re-read some incorrect spelling and not see anything wrong?

er - that last sentence isn't a question ...

The many have to
compensate for the few. Is that fair?

No it isn't fair. The many in Usenet are those who don't bother about
communicating well, in my experience.

If this was uk.english.perfect then possibly no, but it isn't .. it's
a newsgroup for folk to exchange information regarding DIY (or bees or
whatever) ;-)

And I'm still here, still wanting to learn and, occasionally, offer the
benefit of my experience. I didn't start this sub-thread.


I'm not sure about spelling being 'easy' for anyone. It has to be worked
at
just as other things, which are worthwhile, have to be worked at.

But as you know all too well everthing has prioraties (I tried but
have no idea if I'm even close). I suggest someone on this list with
water pouring down the stairs would rather have an informative reply
written all in lower case, with no punctuation and poor spelling than
no answer at all?

That's an extreme example, I've never seen that - that doesn't mean that it
hasn't happened. I really would have expected someone in that position to
find some other way of obtaining advice than going to his computer. Or even
her computer.

By the way, I didn't correct the poster's spelling of Einstein.

Did I suggest you did? Maybe I missunderstood the spirit of your
comment ..

Perhaps you did.

"Mike: No offence meant, and I apologise if any was taken. You must
admit it was a gift...

Mary: True. Like Spellcheckers."

er... ?

For my crude inderstanding of this flexible language of ours I took
that to suggest that 'posters' could use a spellchecker because they
were 'there' or freely available (was I close)? ;-)

I've no idea what you mean. I really did believe that spellcheckers were
part of most verbal applications


Bottom line, I don't like hearing folk saying 'we was' or 'anythink'
but wouldn't assume to correct them .. (unless we were in an English
class and I was the teacher of course) ;-) [1]

Who did I correct? And if I were an English teacher would you accept what I
said?

Mary

T i m wrote:



I am 48 years old and *still* spell some (often the same) words
incorectly .. but as long as I do my best to use capitals and a bit of
formatting / punctuation and everyone can understand the spirit of the
message does it *really* matter?

I'm with you, here :-)

I would love to be able to spell everything correctly (even if only to
get the pedants off my back) but I just can't (English being so messed
up .. "I before E except after C" .. yeah right ..), even when I use
the spell checkers that come in some apps, I can't even get the spell
checker to understand what I'm trying to write (and have to use
another word instead)!

My wife has the ability to spell 99 percent of words, but she is
absolute crap at maths. She runs a scout group and guess who has to
balance the books at the end of the year?

Going back to spelling, I am just hopeless and depend, largely, on spell
checkers. Over the years, they have helped me to spell a hell of a lot
better than I used to do, but alas, I still make mistakes in letters I
write.

I think my problem stemmed from being born with asthma and spending just
as much time at home ill, as I did at school learning.

As far as I know, I am not the least bit dyslexic, but as an aside, I
can't, for the life of me remember a name for over 5 seconds. Give me a
number and it is in my memory for ever. Names fall out of every orifice
I have ;-)
Numbers just go down to my belly and make it just that bit fatter :-)
Good luck with the dyslexia

dave

On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 20:00:51 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:

snip

Who did I correct? And if I were an English teacher would you accept what I
said?

No, because the concept that 100% of the population could get 100% of
their spellings correct is untenable (no matter how hard they try or
you teach). ;-)

And (as was mentioned elsewhere in this thread) nice / important (to
some) the ideal might be, who want's to spellcheck the usenet ..... ?

All the best ..

M i t

Mary Fisher wrote:

I didn't mention dyslexics. I think you're being over-sensitive. I was
replying to Tim, who hasn't claimed to be dyslexic.

No true, but the spelling difficulties he described do corrolate well
with those experianced by dyslexics, and it was continuing a thread that
did mention the issue.

Over sensitive? perhaps ;-)

(One of the most harrowing experiences of school life that I remember,
is that of being confronted with an attitude that if you can't write
down everything, then you should be treated as if you don't know and/or
you are not trying hard enough).

Yes, I agree you will have more impact on some readers if you can spell
faultlessly, although poor grammar is perhaps more noticeable than poor
spelling.


That's your opinion..

Well given that I said "some readers", and I know it to be true for me
and several others, it must be unarguably correct. I accept that it is
not true for all however.

Personally I find poor grammar less easy to read. Poor spelling however
I am almost completely oblivious to, given that most misspellings look
just fine to me!

I am surprised that someone of your abilities should have so much
difficulty coping with the occasional typo or incorrect spelling.
Especially when you are reading a coherent and well constructed sentence.


er- to WHAT sentence are you referring?

Any really. If the point is well made, and grammatically correct then
the meaning is usually clear even if there is the occasional typo or
spelling error.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/