From e0c6872cf40896c7be36b11dcc744620f10adf1d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Norbert Preining <norbert@preining.info>
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2019 13:46:59 +0900
Subject: Initial commit

---
 usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_5/word.tex | 87 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 87 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_5/word.tex

(limited to 'usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_5/word.tex')

diff --git a/usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_5/word.tex b/usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_5/word.tex
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..bbee2459c2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_5/word.tex
@@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
+\title{Department of euphuistic fewtrils}
+\author{gleanings from the Chairman}
+\begin{Article}
+A mailing list long long ago in another galaxy
+carried a missive from a linguaphile wondering
+about the word `coaybtete-leranus' found in Microsoft Word thesaurus.
+Later letters had many suggestions about the origins of the word.  
+Here are some selections from all the speculations, guesses, musings,
+and expert opinions\ldots
+
+\section{Verify-it-first department}
+\noindent\emph{Lee Dickey }:
+ Instead of  `coaybtete-leranus'  
+    I found  `coaybtete-leranous'  
+
+\noindent\emph{Helfrich Raymond }:
+ YES, my Mac Word 5.1 shows this synonym for common!!!
+ Disgruntled ex-employee on the way out?
+ Or, soon-to-be-ex-disgruntled-employee?
+
+\noindent\emph{Jeffrey Windsor }:
+ The OED doesn't list it either. I checked the Oxford English
+ Dictionary, 2nd ed., and found nothing near to `coayete-leranus.'
+ As a matter of fact, there is nothing between `coax' and `cob.'
+ And if it's not in the OED, it isn't.
+
+\section{To-err-is-human-to-really-foul-it-up-takes-a-computer department}
+\noindent\emph{David J. Swift }:
+ I bet it's an algorithm belch.
+
+\noindent\emph{Bob Funchess }:
+ I suspect this is an artifact caused by the way many computerized
+ spelling dictionaries and thesauri store words.
+
+\subsection{Ask-the-source department}
+\noindent\emph{Jason Reed }:
+ I called Microsoft, as I live in Seattle and the call is
+ local, contacted somebody in MS-Word (Mac) (206-635-7200), 
+ anyway\ldots  they told me that it was a unknown word placed 
+  there by mistake.
+
+\section{It's-a-plagiarism-protection-device department}
+\noindent\emph{Andy Eddy, Editorial Manager, New Media Group }:
+ Authors of reference material often put misspellings, fake words or
+ phrases into their work. That way, if there's a question of another
+ reference copying material, words like this would be red flags of
+ where the material came from and very strong evidence in a legal
+ argument.
+
+\noindent\emph{Thomas Hudson }:
+ \ldots  putting in tiny inconsistencies that shouldn't interfere with
+ normal use (who's going to use `coaybtete-leranus'?) but would be an
+ instant tipoff if somebody steals their thesaurus database.
+
+\noindent\emph{Bernard Booth }:
+ When I ran my bookshop we often resorted to various versions of
+ Books In Print --- an extremely useful resource, we discovered,
+ however, that BiP was littered with bogus entries (which were
+ occasionally ordered by customers), the reason for this was to
+ provide proof of plagiarism if someone ever released their own
+ list.  All D.J.Dwyer would have to do is to cite the deliberate
+ errors in the text to prove that it was merely a copy of their
+ own work.
+
+\noindent\emph{Lee Dickey }:
+ Map makers are known to include things in their maps that are
+ deliberately wrong, just to use in the event that they find a
+ blatant copy, because then they can prove that it came from
+ \noindent\emph{their} map, and not from other source.
+
+\section{Other-interesting-tid-bits department}
+\noindent\emph{Jim Falconer }:
+ I tried re-arranging the letters, in case this was an anagram.
+ I came up with `Your Seattle Beacon', which seems just too damn
+ coincidental not to have been done on purpose (not to mention that
+ it was set up to be a synonym for `stodgy' or `dull'). 
+
+\noindent\emph{Luke McGuff }:
+ I've heard that if you type `supercalifragilisticexpialidocious'
+ into an otherwise-empty Word document, you get `precocious.'
+
+\section{Conclusion}
+Most of the responses suggested that the word was a deliberate inclusion,
+designed to thwart unauthorized copying.  That seems like the most valid
+explanation.  Thank you all for helping solve the mystery of the Word!
+
+\end{Article}
-- 
cgit v1.2.3

