From jwagener@trc.amoco.com Thu Aug 13 20:11:05 1992
Received: from noc.msc.edu by dkuug.dk via EUnet with SMTP (5.64+/8+bit/IDA-1.2.8)
	id AA24620; Thu, 13 Aug 92 20:11:05 +0200
Received: from uc.msc.edu by noc.msc.edu (5.65/MSC/v3.0.1(920324))
	id AA25562; Thu, 13 Aug 92 13:11:08 -0500
Received: from [129.230.11.2] by uc.msc.edu (5.65/MSC/v3.0z(901212))
	id AA07844; Thu, 13 Aug 92 13:11:04 -0500
Received: from trc.amoco.com (apctrc.trc.amoco.com) by netserv2 (4.1/SMI-4.0)
	id AA20669; Thu, 13 Aug 92 13:10:54 CDT
Received: from crmac1 (crmac1.trc.amoco.com) by trc.amoco.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA23885; Thu, 13 Aug 92 13:10:51 CDT
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 92 13:10:50 CDT
Message-Id: <9208131810.AA23885@trc.amoco.com>
From: Jerrold L. Wagener <jwagener@trc.amoco.com>
To: SC22WG5@dkuug.dk
Subject: what a difference an "a" makes
X-Charset: ASCII
X-Char-Esc: 29

Re:  the two recent JLW informal reports

Since it has been called to my attention that these reports speak of 
"principle" objectives, which perhaps brings to mind lofty images such as 
apple pie and motherhood (and strategic plans and ...), I wanted to assure 
you that I meant much more mundane "principal" objectives.  Not that the 
objectives in these reports are not worthy of the "le" as well as the "al", 
but that was not my intent.  My deepest apologies for the consternation this 
error must be causing (:-).

 (And I thought I had a firm grip on these two words.)
 (And how do you like that sentence with the triple negative?  I once had a  
  sentence with a quadruple negative, which is surely a principal violation  
  of an important grammatical principle  -  in short, a principle violation.)

Oh well.

Jerry