Re: paleonet Welcome to The Palaeo-oological Discussion Group

["Jere H. Lipps" <jlipps@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Also the hypenated version.

At 06:30 AM 9/11/2006, you wrote:
>Thank you very much Gary...
>
>I think we should include the three different 
>variables: Palaeoology, Paleooology, and Paleooölogy
>
>
>
>Respectfully,
>
>Xavier Panades I Blas
>55, Marksbury Road
>Bedminster
>Bristol BS3 5JY
>England (EC)
>
>http://www.acs.bolton.ac.uk/~xp1pls/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>From: "Dr. Tim Palmer" <tjp@aber.ac.uk>
>Reply-To: paleonet@nhm.ac.uk
>To: paleonet@nhm.ac.uk
>Subject: Re: paleonet Welcome to The Palaeo-oological Discussion Group
>Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 11:01:12 +0100
>
>I think that a real purist might also insist on 
>a diaeresis on the third one, though these days 
>few people are pure enough to know what one of those is!
>
>Tim
>
>>palaeooobiology
>>
>>I like this word.    You should nominate it for 
>>the Oxford English Dictionary.   But you 
>>spelled it with only 2 "o" earlier in the email.
>>Which is correct.   I hope it's the 3 "o" 
>>version, although a purist would insist on a 
>>hyphen, I'd guess, between no. 1 and no. 2.
>
>