> My proof-reading may be getting worse. A good friend pointed out the > following errors. My apologies. David Ritchie, Portland, Oregon > >> I also fell for a tiny little thing, younger >> than the rest, with feathered feet. We asked whether she would be >> picked on by the others. (I almost typed "abused" but that word has >> been too often used in my view, or hearing). My student said he >> thought the chick was big enough to get along. He was right, the >> poor little [mite?] t did her best to get food when food was on offer, >> and [she slowly she the others to the point?] that on a fine sunny day, >> suddenly "she" began to crow. > > >> The littlest among us either had >> gender issues, or (more likely) sexual ones. At dawn the following >> morning the case for maleness became overwhelming. At that hour I >> was trying to get back to sleep. Round and round in my head Bob >> Dylan's rhymes were jumbling like a washer. How can you rhyme "dawn" >> and "gone"? And then as if he'd heard the racket, off went the >> rooster, cock-a-bloomin' doodling. I thought, "God he's gotta go," >> which was the deal actually, sale or return, guaranteed. As is the >> case with many such statements, in reality the words amounted to less >> than you might think. They could have meant, "We will swap a teen >> for another teen, on account of you having poured so much investment >> in and the going rate for a most beautiful rooster," but what they >> really meant was they would refund the price of the chick... if we >> waited till Saturday when their Rooster Adjuster would be available. >> We had a family meeting about killing and feathers and such; we >> thought the coq au vin route and earring feathers could be a better >> deal, money-wise, and the farmer has ethical duties that a pet owner >> does not, but eventually we settled upon trusting the placement guy, >> the adjuster, so we [hied] ourselves to the store on Saturday, only to >> find he had died.