Just a consideration. Cotgreve notes in 1611 (cited in the OED): admiratif, th' admirative point, or point of admiration (and of detestation) marked, or made thus: '!'. Now, it occurs to me that "!" is not really used as sign of detestation as often as Cotgreve thinks they (anglos) should. For one, I don't think it's possible to write, under the circumstances: "My mother killed by bridge collapse!" --- this would be _very_ offensive. One would write, "My mother killed by bridge collapse" I'm not sure about headlines (they are ignorant anyways [sic] those newspaper hackers. But it's my idea that the use of "!" is otiose, and thus a mark of 'admiration' _only_. "and of detestation" has to be understood as "noting that detestation _is_ a class of 'admiration'" -- to 'admire', to 'look at', ad-mirare. "Gotch'em!", as I think M. Thatcher expressed is thus _detested_ by Argentines (on the sinking of the Belgrano). If the writer has the extra time to _write_ "!" it is always a _friendly_ gesture. "Americans go home!" should be taken _jocularly_ thus. If the King says, "Behead him!" that's one thing. But if he has to write his decree in parchment he'll write, "Behead him". In current prose, there is an ambiguity, due to the lax syntax of anglos: "Kill him" can mean, "you do kill him", rather than "Kill him!" Etc. If Desdemona says to Otello, "I hate you!" That's one thing. But if she writes a note that reads, "I hate you!" Otello may well infer: "she loves me. She used the admiration point". Cheers, J. L. Speranza Buenos Aires, author, of "Reflections of an Idler Syntactician", Isle-of-Wight Publications **************Remember Mom this Mother's Day! Find a florist near you now. (http://yellowpages.aol.com/search?query=florist&ncid=emlcntusyelp00000006) ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html