I can't answer gailr
's query about «craven images», save to report that I am utterly opposed to them (which is why I don't allow photos of myself to be taken). But I sincerely hope that Dr Goodward
can be persuaded to look with favour upon Katy
's recent suggestion
, for there seem to be a lot of people out there who really need to learn what it means - or equally, if not more important, what it does not
mean. The other day, after reading National Geographic
's October 2004 issue (the last of those which had accumulated home in Stockholm while I was away trying to earn enough money to pay the rent in Norway) I had occasion to write a letter to the editors, a portion of which I take the liberty of citing below :
... With regard to author Kate Krautkramer's text, I should like to add a «don't» to her many «do's» : Don't confuse the word «iconclastic» with «iconic» in a sentence like «Note iconoclastic characters : gold miner, prostitute, cowboy.» Perhaps one could also add a «do» : Do check in a dictionary before using words with which you are not familiar. ...
PS : Shouldn't an editor or a proofreader have caught this egregious error before the proofs were delivered to the printer ?
In the event «iconoclastic» is elevated to the status of GWotD
, I hope our dear doctor
will send a link to the NGM
PS : Gailr
, haven't you got one «i» too many in the last word of your current tag ?...