Thanks Terri. Something to ponder.
Colin
----- Original Message -----
From: "alderoak" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, February 23, 2003 7:02 PM
Subject: Re: New Sub 'NOT EXPECTING ANGELS'
> What I love about 'ings' is the lambswool certainty of a familiar argument
> What I hate about family arguments is....
>
> Terri
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: The Pennine Poetry Works [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On
> Behalf Of Colin dewar
> Sent: 23 February 2003 16:18
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: New Sub 'NOT EXPECTING ANGELS'
>
>
> Ann/VW/Sue,
>
> I'm curious. This is not the first time I've heard people apologising for
> "ings". What's up with ings? Apologies if you have had to explain this
> before but it sounds like there is something I should know here.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Colin
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sue Scalf" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2003 11:56 AM
> Subject: Re: New Sub 'NOT EXPECTING ANGELS'
>
>
> > Your poem is absolutely lovely, and never apologize for "ings."
> > They serve a purpose musically. I think of them as the soprano notes,
the
> > high "c" on the piano. Sue
> >
> >
>
>
|