User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Spelling debates/@comment-24894325-20151219214614/@comment-24894325-20151231093406: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
(Bot: Automated import of articles) |
m (Bot: Automated text replacement (-'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)'''\n([\s\S]*)\[\[Category:SOTO archive posts\]\] +\7\2/\4-\3/\6-\5)) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Unbelievable. It remains to ask one of the writers to include the discussion of chequers/checkers into their next novel, and we are completely bulletproof. | Unbelievable. It remains to ask one of the writers to include the discussion of chequers/checkers into their next novel, and we are completely bulletproof. | ||
On a more serious note, if I understand correctly, an in-universe source on the spelling in general beats the script of any particular audio: for audios, the words themselves are in-universe but their spelling is not, right? More precisely, if there is a doubt as to which word was pronounced (say, because Briggs went overboard with distorting for his newest Dalek persona), then the script is definitive. But if the same word could have different variant spellings, then the spelling rules of DWU should trump the spelling in the script. | On a more serious note, if I understand correctly, an in-universe source on the spelling in general beats the script of any particular audio: for audios, the words themselves are in-universe but their spelling is not, right? More precisely, if there is a doubt as to which word was pronounced (say, because Briggs went overboard with distorting for his newest Dalek persona), then the script is definitive. But if the same word could have different variant spellings, then the spelling rules of DWU should trump the spelling in the script. | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|Spelling debates/20151219214614-24894325/20151231093406-24894325]]</noinclude> | ||
Latest revision as of 15:42, 27 April 2023
Unbelievable. It remains to ask one of the writers to include the discussion of chequers/checkers into their next novel, and we are completely bulletproof.
On a more serious note, if I understand correctly, an in-universe source on the spelling in general beats the script of any particular audio: for audios, the words themselves are in-universe but their spelling is not, right? More precisely, if there is a doubt as to which word was pronounced (say, because Briggs went overboard with distorting for his newest Dalek persona), then the script is definitive. But if the same word could have different variant spellings, then the spelling rules of DWU should trump the spelling in the script.
