[Bell Historians] One N or two?
Edward W Martin
edward.w.martin at uv45bK5Rhm4bFbBQ4pljcJtV66cA-pJRIZKwQ4B3l0AKoL209jHsaCvPadS2-zbEHTdb3MUtPlVwPIce8qId.yahoo.invalid
Thu Sep 14 20:14:08 BST 2006
--- In bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com, "David Bryant"
<davidbryant at ...> wrote:
>
> Seems like all members of this list who have expressed an opinion
are in agreement - it has one 'n'!
>
> Incidentally, they make good bookends if suitably mounted - canons,
that is.
>
> David
>
Actually when your message arrived (message #10903) the following were
pro 'n'
#10894 D.Cawley
#10896 D.Bryant
#10899 C.Pickford
#10900 M.Wigby
The following were pro 'nn':
#10897 E.Martin
#10898 R.Bickerton
Todate the tally stands as above with the addition of
pro 'nn'
#10904 I.Johnson
#10907 S.Bond
The latest tally is
pro 'n" 5 members
pro 'nn' 4 members
non members but thoroughgly reliable on this matter include
Rev Ellacomb (dec)
the editors of the OED (dec)
the author of The Tintinnalogia (dec)
mew
More information about the Bell-historians
mailing list