don't rely on spell-checkers!

[Laurence Horn]

An elegant find:

At 4:33 PM -0400 5/14/99, Ron Butters wrote:
>Didn't someone just write recently, "Don't rely on spell-checkers"? In fact,
>it is worse. One has to make sure that one doesn't inadvertently correct
>something that is fine into something that is not fine. In writing to a
>student just now, I wrote,
>". . .  try Victoria Fromkin and Robert Rodman, _An Introduction to
>Language_, 6th edition." My AOL spell-checker automatically corrected this to
>"". . .  try Victoria Foreskin and Robert Rodman, _An Introduction to
>Language_, 6th edition."

I assume there was some sort of harmony rule in effect:  AOL must have
figured their preputial reading goes more naturally with "Rodman", on
either the compositional or the Dennis-allusional reading of the latter.

Larry

(Ron, I'm assuming you won't mind the cross-posting to outil.  --LH)