Pete C.
I beg to disagree. They were too stupid to pay someone fluent in English to simply proofread what they were *publishing*.
Now, in spite of what you read from me here, I'm damn good with this language. I can make myself understood to virtually any audience that's at least somewhat fluent in English. This is what the writers of 'Chinglish' so miserably fail to do.
I recently saw a set of instructions for buttembling a simple piece of office furniture. Where it was telling the buttembler to attach one part to another, it used a word *I've never seen*! Folks, I'm a *lawyer*. I was a *spelling champion* when I was in school. I *know English words*! But I'd never seen this one. I can't even remember it now (It started with an 'a'.), but when I looked it up, I was astounded to find that it meant 'attach' or 'adhere'. It was one of those "Well, slap my butt and call me 'Fanny'!" moments. Here was someone in an obscure Asian company that managed to stumble across a correct word in a dictionary that *virtually no English-speaking person would recognize*!
celphones was Why not methanol 4862Magnulus You just noted the same thing that I noted previously, that someone who is proficient at text messaging does not have to take their attention off the road...
You know, *somewhere* along the distribution line from China to the US, there's got to be *someone* involved who could write a coherent instruction sheet! It's the failure to recognize this that I consider stupid. -- C.R. Krieger (Been there; done that)
