http://www.sineadgleeson.com/blog/2005/09/10/166/ Sinéad Gleeson's blog Tue, 14 Oct 2008 00:03:23 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.2 http://www.sineadgleeson.com/blog/2005/09/10/166/#comment-267 damian Mon, 12 Sep 2005 14:34:43 +0000 http://www.sineadgleeson.com/blog/2005/09/10/166/#comment-267 It really is amazing that this is intelligible, because when one looks at it analytically there's really no reason why we should be able to erad it quickly much less understand it. It really is amazing that this is intelligible, because when one looks at it analytically there’s really no reason why we should be able to erad it quickly much less understand it.

]]> http://www.sineadgleeson.com/blog/2005/09/10/166/#comment-263 MacDara Sat, 10 Sep 2005 19:46:31 +0000 http://www.sineadgleeson.com/blog/2005/09/10/166/#comment-263 I've seen that somewhere before, sometime last year. It was semi-debunked; it's not exactly to do with the first and last letters -- the number of letters in the word, and the context of its place in the sentence matters too. I’ve seen that somewhere before, sometime last year. It was semi-debunked; it’s not exactly to do with the first and last letters — the number of letters in the word, and the context of its place in the sentence matters too.

]]> http://www.sineadgleeson.com/blog/2005/09/10/166/#comment-262 Karie Sat, 10 Sep 2005 15:20:41 +0000 http://www.sineadgleeson.com/blog/2005/09/10/166/#comment-262 Nope but it makes sense. Thanks for the info. Nope but it makes sense. Thanks for the info.

]]>