[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