[projectaon] Re: Freeway Warrior

  • From: James Durrant <james.durrant@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2015 09:38:31 +0100

This is most interesting!
I have heard and used counterfire in the context mentioned in the book - but
indeed, dictionary definitions would say this is wrong!
In such cases, it may be best to rephrase (since I am not sure "counter fire"
with a space works either)
How about "return fire"?
p.s. - I'm not sure if Alan is on the mailing list yet?

From: jonathan.blake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 23:39:25 +0000
Subject: [projectaon] Re: Freeway Warrior
To: projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Greetings, Alan.

One thing to keep in mind with the books is that they use British English
spellings, and we keep them that way, even in these books which take place in
America. Sometimes it seems odd to American eyes (like mine), but a lot of the
typos you found are actually legitimate spellings. This is especially important
if running a spell checker. :)

Removing the issues that you reported that we can attribute to British
spellings, we're left with the following, I believe.

equipmnt.htm the the the duplicated word in footnote #1

footnotz.htm the the the duplicated word in footnote #1


Agreed that these should be fixed, of course. :)

sect213.htm counterfire counter fire



This brings up an interesting issue. The word "counterfire" is a legitimate
word, but as far as I can tell, it usually means fire that's intended to
destroy enemy weapons. If so, I'm not sure it applies here.

Does anyone know better?

Thanks, Alan.

--
Jon

Other related posts: