Posted by Jock on June 27, 2006 at 11:16:21 from 81.76.86.2 user Jock.
In Reply to: Re: Kanchenjunga! (was Kanchenjunga or Kangchenjunga) posted by John on June 27, 2006 at 00:19:16:
To the Editor of the “The Times”
Sir,
It has come to my notice that a certain colonial gentleman writing in one of the new-fangled journals takes issue with the status of this broadsheet as a primary source regarding the spelling of geographical place names.
This gentleman claims that what may or may not have occurred over tea and tiffin with the King of Sikkim and one of His Majesty’s envoys constitutes a primary source, while what is printed in “The Times” is only a secondary source. He also refers to custom and practice amongst a certain group of hill walkers.
I believe that our colonial friend has confused his etymology with history. English is the greatest language in the world and what is or is not correct cannot be determined by private treaty or a group of enthusiasts. It is you Sir, as the custodian of The Empire’s and Great Britain’s official record, who determines what is decorous and felicitous in the language of Shakespeare and Milton.
I have the honour to be, Sir
your humble and obedient servant
Brigadier Iam Always-Right,
Sandhurst
England