"William Moss" says:
>Some may consider this irrelevant to archaeology, but since it was first
>posted on the very august Britarch list, I felt it would be worth passing
on
>to a US-based constituency, especially given the sense of humour widely
>attributed by the public to archaeologists...

I found some cultural anthropological relevance, and some truly valuable
focus in the linguistic issues presented.   I particularly agreed with the
innovative concept that: {There is no such thing as "US English"}.  It has
recently come to my attention that the language spoken by the referenced 265
million confused voters is a constant source of controversy for a small,
resilient (but not very insular) population of primitive and remote
islanders scattered about the periphery of the North Sea.  The irony is that
these (at least partially autochthonous) peoples are somehow convinced that
they should have "a ruling authority" over the actual usage of the more
dynamic tongue. (It is presumed that this localized view stems from the
claim that they speak an ancient dialect of "American", elements of which
are sometimes evident and preserved in a local patois called "English"). It
is really quite cute, and further serious study should be supported. :-)

Please feel free to crosspost my limited review and supportive comment back
to the source of the position.

La Revedere
Rex H. McTyeire
Bucharest, Romania
<[log in to unmask]>