Sylvia Browne: A Spelling Lesson

[RSLancastr]

From the August 10th "Ask Sylvia" podcast, the subject of which was "tulpas" (beings supposedly brought into existance by the thoughts and willpower of people).

"Today we're going to be talking about tulpas.

T-U-L-P-A-apostrophe-S."

I would hope that someone with a Master's Degree in English Literature would have more than a fifth-grade education in spelling.

[Locknar]

LOL

[Nucular]

Is it the apostrophic error of which you speak? Because if we're being pedants, that makes it a punctuation, rather than spelling, mistake ;)

Still, maybe she thinks that if you've made a word up to start with, you can apply any rules to it you like...

[ColumbusRyan]

Maybe Francine spells it like that.

[DJM]

Still, maybe she thinks that if you've made a word up to start with, you can apply any rules to it you like...

It's a known word, she's not the one who made it up.

Robert, I really appreciate your hard work you've done with the Stop Sylvia website, but I believe all these Master's Degree remarks are a bit pointless and only seems like nitpicking. Educated people can make mistakes as well. Even you made a mistake by calling this thread A Spelling Lesson, as I'm pretty sure apostrophe is indeed considered a punctuation mark. And even if it was a spelling mistake, I've seen some of those made by many educated people. No one is perfect.

Perhaps you should stick to exposing Sylvia's psychic claims, as I'm sure her believers couldn't care less about her fifth-grade homework.

[headscratcher4]

Clearly, you don’t know your mystical, pseudo Aramaic…..

[Lisa Simpson]

It's a known word, she's not the one who made it up.

Robert, I really appreciate your hard work you've done with the Stop Sylvia website, but I believe all these Master's Degree remarks are a bit pointless and only seems like nitpicking. Educated people can make mistakes as well. Even you made a mistake by calling this thread A Spelling Lesson, as I'm pretty sure apostrophe is indeed considered a punctuation mark. And even if it was a spelling mistake, I've seen some of those made by many educated people. No one is perfect.

Perhaps you should stick to exposing Sylvia's psychic claims, as I'm sure her believers couldn't care less about her fifth-grade homework.

I disagree. She claims to have a Master's Degree, but doesn't know one of the simplest rules of the English Language. My son in 7th grade knows that rule. She should be called out on all her claims.

[DJM]

But I think that the fact she doesn't have a Master's Degree has already been covered a few times before and on the website itself. You could say that it was even somewhat proven since she doesn't give any evidence of that. So it seems pretty out of place to keep correcting her over every mistake she does. It seems like a cynical thing to do as it has nothing to do with her psychic claims, and only makes it look like making fun of someone's education. Something that I'm against of, Sylvia Browne or not.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

She mistook the plural (tulpas) for the possessive (tulpa's)? That's not a fifth grade spelling mistake, that's a first grade spelling mistake.

[DJM]

Still not sure why it's a SPELLING mistake in the first place. This is what they also teach around first grade:

Punctuation helps readers break writing into logical units, making it easier to follow. Punctuation includes all the conventional signs used to separate words: spaces, first-line indentation of paragraphs, blank lines, uppercase letters, and various marks or stops (commas, periods, semicolons, and so on)

Did people here skip that class? :rolleyes:

[Garrette]

Still not sure why it's a SPELLING mistake in the first place. This is what they also teach around first grade:

Punctuation helps readers break writing into logical units, making it easier to follow. Punctuation includes all the conventional signs used to separate words: spaces, first-line indentation of paragraphs, blank lines, uppercase letters, and various marks or stops (commas, periods, semicolons, and so on)

Did people here skip that class? :rolleyes:In this case, it's both a spelling mistake and a punctuation error. The punctuation indicating possessive prohibited the proper spelling for the plural.

[DJM]

My teacher always used to say that stuff is related to punctuation, I don't remember anything about spelling. And I always thought I was an educated person. :(

[waltdakind]

I, for one, enjoy hearing every mistake she makes. She is one of the few people who I feel no remorse following a bit of schadenfreude at her expense.

It's yet another confirming instance of what a fraud she is. If she is to make the claim of having a Master's Degree in English Literature, she should at least show us the courtesy of familiarizing herself with the use of the apostrophe, which as far as I am concerned is not a little mistake.

While it is indeed an error in punctuation, I can understand referring to the thread as a spelling lesson since she was in the act of instructing her listeners how to spell "tulpas".

I wonder if a politely worded e-mail instructing her on the use of the apostrophe would lead to a correction in a later podcast?

[DJM]

I've seen worse mistakes done by reporters. Even on StopSylvia.com there have been some amusing mistakes with spelling and grammar that were corrected by the visitors, and yet no one would hint that Robert isn't educated enough.

If all the Sylvia debunking was a TV show, I would say that this thread has just jumped the shark.

[Silly Green Monkey]

but that comparison would only be valid if RSL claimed to have advanced degrees in English as well.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

I actually agree. Putting the apostrophe in the wrong place is the kind of brainfart thing we all do once in a while that's in no way indicative or reflective of our language skills.

This specifically I wouldn't castigate her for...but she still has a vocabulary of about 200 words and sounds like your friend's redneck grandmother.

[DJM]

but that comparison would only be valid if RSL claimed to have advanced degrees in English as well.


Do you really think any of her believers care about her degrees in English? Is that one of the claims that makes them spend so much money on her? No, they care about her being a psychic, that she can predict the future, to speak with their dead relatives.

Only ones who seem to care about this issue are the skeptics themselves, which makes this kind of debunking pretty pointless.

[ObscureReferenceMan]

DJM,

In Robert's defense (not that he needs defending by me, but I really like the guy, and thought I'd chime in), he did make the post here, where we all laugh and point at Sylvia. And NOT at his SSB site, where, yes, it might seem a little too petty to point out.

[Piscivore]

I, for one, enjoy hearing every mistake she makes. She is one of the few people who I feel no remorse following a bit of schadenfreude at her expense.
Feel it, sure. But trumpeting it on the streetcorner makes one look like one has an biased anti-Sylvia agenda rather than a commitment to fact and reason.

It's yet another confirming instance of what a fraud she is.
No, it is a silly mistake. Let's not go overboard.

If she is to make the claim of having a Master's Degree in English Literature, she should at least show us the courtesy of familiarizing herself with the use of the apostrophe, which as far as I am concerned is not a little mistake.
Yes, it is. Given the number of spelling and punctuation errors I see in the newspaper, magazines and even published books- made by people who are supposed to be professional wordsmiths- this is a non-issue.

DJM has got the truth of it.

[DJM]

DJM,

In Robert's defense (not that he needs defending by me, but I really like the guy, and thought I'd chime in), he did make the post here, where we all laugh and point at Sylvia. And NOT at his SSB site, where, yes, it might seem a little too petty to point out.

But remember that this is not a closed forum, many of Sylvia's supporters could be reading it here as well. So in my opinion posting petty threads wouldn't help much to make them take the skeptics seriously.

I like Robert too, just have a problem with this specific approach. Which sadly I've also read in some of his articles on his own site.

[ObscureReferenceMan]

But remember that this is not a closed forum, many of Sylvia's supporters could be reading it here as well. So in my opinion posting petty threads wouldn't help much to make them take the skeptics seriously.

I like Robert too, just have a problem with this specific approach. Which sadly I've also read in some of his articles on his own site.

True. But even though this site is "open", it's not the SSB site. Putting unflattering articles, facts or links here is just our way of having a laugh. Items posted at SSB are (I believe) done so to show Sylvia's true colors.

Also, I've read almost everything on Robert's site, and I believe he is one of the most fair and balanced writers I know.

[RSLancastr]

Robert, I really appreciate your hard work you've done with the Stop Sylvia website, but I believe all these Master's Degree remarks are a bit pointless and only seems like nitpicking.I would agree with you had I based a whole article on the site around this. As it is, I started a thread here about it, as I found it humorous, and knew that some here would as well.

Educated people can make mistakes as well. Even you made a mistake by calling this thread A Spelling Lesson, as I'm pretty sure apostrophe is indeed considered a punctuation mark.Punctuation is part of spelling lessons, or at least it was when I was a kid. Had I made the mistake in the OP on a spelling test, it would have been marked incorrect.

Perhaps you should stick to exposing Sylvia's psychic claims, as I'm sure her believers couldn't care less about her fifth-grade homework.I appreciate the advice, but will continue to mention things here on the forum which I may not on the site. And, who knows, I might even put together an article with a dozen or more of her biggest howlers, English-wise. Such as the time she praised one of her ministers by saying "I have always held you up to others as the modicum of virtue."

Even on StopSylvia.com there have been some amusing mistakes with spelling and grammar that were corrected by the visitors, and yet no one would hint that Robert isn't educated enough.Sure, typos galore, as well as some out-and-out errors. But I have never claimed to have any degree in anything, let alone a Master's in English Lit.

If all the Sylvia debunking was a TV show, I would say that this thread has just jumped the shark.Sorry you feel that way, but thanks for letting me know.

[DJM]

Sure, typos galore, as well as some out-and-out errors. But I have never claimed to have any degree in anything, let alone a Master's in English Lit.

Sorry you feel that way, but thanks for letting me know.

Yes, because all the people with a Master Degree are perfect and never make any mistakes. I've read so many books by educated and well respected authors with funny spelling mistakes which even the editors (who I suppose also know a thing or two about English) seemed to miss.

But looks like you are having a lot of fun with this issue, so I will try not to ruin it for you.

[Piscivore]

Also, I've read almost everything on Robert's site, and I believe he is one of the most fair and balanced writers I know.

I agree.

[Kilgore Trout]

I found it amusing. Didn't seem like a simple sort of mistake because she was speaking at the time, and chose to spell it, seemingly for the benefit of her listeners.

L-E-C-I-T-H-I-N.

[RSLancastr]

I actually agree. Putting the apostrophe in the wrong place is the kind of brainfart thing we all do once in a while that's in no way indicative or reflective of our language skills.Yes, I would imagine that I have incorrectly used the 's to indicate a plural, especially via keyboard, where I have been known to make to/too our/are type errors galore.

But to spell it aloud with the apostrophe? :rolleyes:

I like Robert too, just have a problem with this specific approach. Which sadly I've also read in some of his articles on his own site.Well, I'm always interested in criticism of the site. I would be interested in your pointing out to me (if you haven't already) where I have used "this specific approach" on the site.

[RSLancastr]

DJM has got the truth of it.Et tu, Piscus?

:D

[Locknar]

Yes, because all the people with a Master Degree are perfect and never make any mistakes. I've read so many books by educated and well respected authors with funny spelling mistakes which even the editors (who I suppose also know a thing or two about English) seemed to miss.

But looks like you are having a lot of fun with this issue, so I will try not to ruin it for you.
Well…I think you are reading a bit more into this then what I believe Robert intended.

Overall, it was a simple mistake…but what makes it funny (vs say the smoking gun that proves she is a fraud) is that she claims to have a Masters Degree in English Lit.

Is it a bit on the nit-picky side…yes. However, as the saying goes “you reap what you sow”…she makes a point of being Ms Proper English, with her spelling lesions, correcting folks, etc.

Now…if Robert did an entire article based on just this single incident, I’d agree with you. In this case, it’s just a funny anecdote.

[Nucular]

spelling lesions

:D

[FramerDave]

Yes, because all the people with a Master Degree are perfect and never make any mistakes. I've read so many books by educated and well respected authors with funny spelling mistakes which even the editors (who I suppose also know a thing or two about English) seemed to miss.

But looks like you are having a lot of fun with this issue, so I will try not to ruin it for you.

Lighten up, Frances.

[NobbyNobbs]

But I think that the fact she doesn't have a Master's Degree has already been covered a few times before and on the website itself. You could say that it was even somewhat proven since she doesn't give any evidence of that. So it seems pretty out of place to keep correcting her over every mistake she does. It seems like a cynical thing to do as it has nothing to do with her psychic claims, and only makes it look like making fun of someone's education. Something that I'm against of, Sylvia Browne or not.


The fact that she doesn't have psychic abilities has also been covered a few times before, but that's no reason to let up.

I say, if she makes claims and the evidence shows otherwise, that evidence should be brought to light.

[DJM]

Well, I'm always interested in criticism of the site. I would be interested in your pointing out to me (if you haven't already) where I have used "this specific approach" on the site.

I remember a few times that you've sarcastically mentioned the Master Degree after Sylvia made some sort of mistake in English. And you mentioned earlier you might do an article just about that.

That approach, which has nothing to do with psychics or the paranormal, or even evidence about her not having a degree, as many another educated people make such stupid mistakes sometimes. It seems more like an excuse to make fun of her, rather than actually trying to prove something.

[Alice Shortcake]

I agree with Locknar. The humour is in the fact that Sylvia, a best-selling author with a Master's degree in English, actually went to the trouble of spelling the word out aloud and got it wrong. If you're going to borrow entities from Tibetan mysticism the least you can do is get their names right!

[Minarvia]

I would hate to have some of this crowd around when once in a while I laugh at an off-colour joke or some silly physical comedy. :blush: But, each to his own.

Personally, I found Rob's post amusing. I can't help but chuckle when Sylvia does such a thing. :)

[Piscivore]

Et tu, Piscus?

:D
I have to say something critical of you every now and again to maintain some semblance of credibility. ;)

[CFLarsen]

She qualifies for Vice President of the United States.

[bjb]

The issue is not Sylvia's lack of education, but her lack of education in spite of claiming to hold an advanced degree in English. She's been asked to provide evidence of her degree but so far, she has not been able to do so. Therefore, it is fair to bring up these mistakes because they are evidence that Sylvia has made a false claim about herself.

If she never claimed to have an MA, then it would not be fair to attack based on a claim she never made. If she did claim to have an MA *and* she produced the evidence, once again, it would not be fair to criticize her because she would have made a simple mistake that anybody might make. However, Sylvia claims a master's degree but shows no documentation for one, and makes mistakes that a graduate student should never make. Criticizing these mistakes is appropriate not because it attacks Sylvia's lack of education, but her lack of credibility.

[Zep]

It's an unintentional joke with the same base as this: "I are nott a enginear, butt now i can spel itt!"

I don't think it's related in any way to Sylvia per se. It's to do with the claimed command of the written language. Frankly, I would find it just as funny coming from the current US president (or Dan Quayle ;)). At the other end of the scale, it would be horrifying coming from a Nobel laureate in literature. Sylvia, the person, claims to have a degree in English Literature, which should put her nearer the top of the scale than the bottom. So my reaction is one of one giant *SNORT!*, plus a distinct skepticism of her so-called degree.

[JoeTheJuggler]

Yes, because all the people with a Master Degree are perfect and never make any mistakes. I've read so many books by educated and well respected authors with funny spelling mistakes which even the editors (who I suppose also know a thing or two about English) seemed to miss.

But looks like you are having a lot of fun with this issue, so I will try not to ruin it for you.

DJM, maybe you're missing the point that while Sylvia claims to have a Master's in English, she doesn't really have one.

Someone once wrote an article on the subject:

http://stopsylviabrowne.com/articles/sylviabrownetranscript.shtml
:D

[rwguinn]

She mistook the plural (tulpas) for the possessive (tulpa's)? That's not a fifth grade spelling mistake, that's a first grade spelling mistake.

One word for all youse folks:
Hawai'i

I am told that that is the preferred spelling.
so, tulpa's is not necessarily possesive.
it's part of the word.

[T'ai Chi]

Must be the new skeptical movement (aka scoffing, heckling, complaining) ?

[Reno]

She qualifies for Vice President of the United States.

She qualifie's for Vice President of the United State's

[bjb]

You mean "qualify's" !

[PBTree]

Just a few thoughts.

Color (American) - Colour (English)
Defense (American) - Defence (English)
Jail (American) - Gaol (English)
Virtualize (American) - Virtualise (English) and so on and so on...

I think English really depends on where you are.

Maybe we should say that 'the clawed one' has a Master's Degree in American Literature ??

Listen to a few English TV shows/news broadcasts and you will find that a lot of them are unable to speak the language either. The letters R and TH have a rough time over there. ie Tewwowists wiff bombs

Also, did most of the posters miss the apostrophe in Master's. ie I thought it was possessive of the master.

[Reno]

You mean "qualify's" !

ye's.

[DJM]

Turns out Sylvia might actually be correct, and that word is also spelled Tulpa's. Found a few sources.

http://www.amazon.com/Incredible-Reality-Robert-E-Bonson/dp/1413485596

http://home.comcast.net/~docterspond/Wx5desireset/Constructs.html

http://www.rio-reviewers.com/newsletter/2005/mar-apr.html

[Zep]

Turns out Sylvia might actually be correct, and that word is also spelled Tulpa's. Found a few sources.

http://www.amazon.com/Incredible-Reality-Robert-E-Bonson/dp/1413485596

http://home.comcast.net/~docterspond/Wx5desireset/Constructs.html

http://www.rio-reviewers.com/newsletter/2005/mar-apr.html

All those references use the word in the sense of plural entities, not a name for a singular entity or a possessive. Elsewhere in the same pages, the same word is spelled without the apostrophe but meaning the same thing - plural entities only. To me, that signifies they too don't yet have basic English punctuation skills down pat.

Can I suggest reading what you Google? ;)

[DJM]

As English isn't my first language I could be wrong about this issue. But from what I can read in the links, those words were written within the same conetxt as Sylvia's. Meaning Tulpa as plural.

And I can't see that word written on any of those pages without the apostrophe, but maybe it's a problem with my search option. Would appreciate if you can post it here.

About them not having basic punctuation skills.. one of that is taken from a book description on Amazon. I think it would be prerry weird if it's just a mistake.

[RSL's better half]

She qualifies for Vice President of the United States.


Ah, heck. I cringe every time the President of the United States says "nucular."

Sylvia Browne for President!

[JoeTheJuggler]

She qualifie's for Vice President of the United State's

You say potatoe and I say potato.

[DJM]

I think the confusion with some people here is about writing foreign words in English. Which is exactly what Tulpa is in this case. My first language is Hebrew and many times when the words are written in English letters, suddenly appear apostrophes that have never been there before. It's mostly done to show exactly how to pronounce the word. But the same words can also be written without the apostrophes, it's alright either way.

I believe that's the case with Tulpa's, it's probably just to show how to pronounce the word. Here's another one who writes it like that.

http://www.barbelith.com/topic/1898

[RSLancastr]

I think the confusion with some people here is about writing foreign words in English. Which is exactly what Tulpa is in this case.Sorry DJM, but that is not the case. Do a google search on "apostrophes in plurals" or "apostrophe in plurals" and read some of the resulting articles.

My first language is Hebrew and many times when the words are written in English letters, suddenly appear apostrophes that have never been there before. It's mostly done to show exactly how to pronounce the word.You'd have to give me an example, as I am not following what you mean here.

I believe that's the case with Tulpa's, it's probably just to show how to pronounce the word.Sorry, no. In English, it would be pronounced the same with or without the apostrophe, so it is definitely NOT to show pronunciation.

Here's another one who writes it like that.

http://www.barbelith.com/topic/1898DJM, chances are you can find many, many examples of any given spelling, grammar or punctuation error on the web. And this one - erroneous use of an apostrophe in a plural - is an extremely common one.

[RSLancastr]

Sylvia Browne for President!Can a convicted felon be President?

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

Can a convicted felon be President?

Mhmm! That's how we got the current one.

It's true- Bush is the only President of the United States with a criminal record. Nothwithstanding that Thomas Jefferson once shot a man when it was legal to do so in a duel.

And guess what Bush was convicted for. That's right, drunk driving.

[DJM]

You'd have to give me an example, as I am not following what you mean here.

Example. misa'da is restaurant in Hebrew. But it could be also written as misada. Either way it's correct. Not sure why the apostrophe is even there as it's pronounced the same, but I guess that's the "official" spelling of it. Many words have that kind of apostrophes that isn't there in the original word.


DJM, chances are you can find many, many examples of any given spelling, grammar or punctuation error on the web. And this one - erroneous use of an apostrophe in a plural - is an extremely common one.

Well, I found that in a book description on Amazon , and also in other aticles of people who seem to know what they are talking about. It's not like some Youtube replies written by kids. Maybe the S at the end is also there in the original language and that's the official spelling. Maybe the apostrophe doesn't have a real meaning, but still used in this specific word. Remember we are not talking here about a regular English word, but from a Tibetan language. There might a good reason for that kind of spelling within that conext. Things are not always all black and white when different languages are involved.

[ExMinister]

DJM, Sylvia isn't speaking Tibetan; she's speaking in English, and the only time "tulpa's" is correct in English is when one is attempting to say "tulpa is" or indicate that the tulpa is in possession of something. I'm pretty sure I learned the apostrophe rule in grade school, and I don't have the Master's degree in English that Sylvia claims to have. As was pointed out earlier, just because other people spell the word wrong doesn't make them correct, and a person with a Master's degree in English is expected to know at least the basics.

It may be a small thing, but the fact that it is a small thing makes it even stranger that Sylvia, if she had such a degree, wouldn't know the difference. All the small things add up, and Sylvia has not only failed to produce evidence that she has this degree, but she consistently does this type of thing, which does make it funny. Robert, I think an article on the "best of" these one day would be great.

[DJM]

It doesn't matter that she's speaking English, if the word itself isn't actually in English. I think the purpose of the apostrophe after "a" is to signify aspiration, at least that's what I understood from this.

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Tibetian/Section_One_-_The_Alphabet

[PBTree]

DJM, Sylvia isn't speaking Tibetan; she's speaking in English, and the only time "tulpa's" is correct in English is when one is attempting to say "tulpa is" or indicate that the tulpa is in possession of something. I'm pretty sure I learned the apostrophe rule in grade school, and I don't have the Master's degree in English that Sylvia claims to have. As was pointed out earlier, just because other people spell the word wrong doesn't make them correct, and a person with a Master's degree in English is expected to know at least the basics.

It may be a small thing, but the fact that it is a small thing makes it even stranger that Sylvia, if she had such a degree, wouldn't know the difference. All the small things add up, and Sylvia has not only failed to produce evidence that she has this degree, but she consistently does this type of thing, which does make it funny. Robert, I think an article on the "best of" these one day would be great.

Once again I state that (this time without the supposed humour {notice the spelling of humour}), English is English is English. Sylvia didn't use an apostrophe but then again, you also used a comma before ' but '. So why is she "wronger" than you.

Put simply, I was always taught that ' and ' and ' but ' were two of the words used as a pause in a sentence, therefore a comma (another pause) was never required. Why wait twice as long?

I can say " eye-sore the lite " and it means just as much as " I saw the light " as long as it is a part of a relevant conversation. If you email me that you want me to meet you at Harry Smiths house at 3pm, I am not going to turn up just because you missed out on an apostrophe in Smiths.

Unless you are going to use correct and proper English at all times, which includes English spelling & punctuation (not national derivations), then everything is fair game. As long as you get the message across.

But she definitely is a dip-stick for spelling it out. That was just a sure sign of arrogance and her saying, "boy can I spell and you poor non-s'eye'kiks can't".

[ExMinister]

Once again I state that (this time without the supposed humour {notice the spelling of humour}), English is English is English. Sylvia didn't use an apostrophe but then again, you also used a comma before ' but '. So why is she "wronger" than you.

Put simply, I was always taught that ' and ' and ' but ' were two of the words used as a pause in a sentence, therefore a comma (another pause) was never required. Why wait twice as long?

I can say " eye-sore the lite " and it means just as much as " I saw the light " as long as it is a part of a relevant conversation. If you email me that you want me to meet you at Harry Smiths house at 3pm, I am not going to turn up just because you missed out on an apostrophe in Smiths.

Unless you are going to use correct and proper English at all times, which includes English spelling & punctuation (not national derivations), then everything is fair game. As long as you get the message across.

But she definitely is a dip-stick for spelling it out. That was just a sure sign of arrogance and her saying, "boy can I spell and you poor non-s'eye'kiks can't".

Commas are used to indicate a break in thought, to set off material, and to introduce a new but connected thought. They are used to enhance clarity, improve readability, or diminish confusion or misunderstanding. Therefore, my use of the comma there really was appropriate. Not that it's a big deal. At any rate, in standard usage, apostrophes are not used to form plurals, with few exceptions.

I don't claim to have a Master's degree in English, anyway! If I did, of course I would be fair game, too, if I made those types of mistakes. That's really my whole point. I agree with you that the way most of us speak and write is a different story, especially in more relaxed circumstances, such as this forum.

I also disagree that any real argument can be made that "tulpa's" is an example of the proper use of English. I agree that this is a sign of Sylvia's arrogance, though. The irony is that she really can't spell very well and she mixes up her verb tenses constantly when speaking. Coming from a person who claims to have such a degree, I find these examples interesting and kind of humorous as they seem to back up Robert's suspicion that such a degree does not exist. That's all.

[Alice Shortcake]

The mistake we're getting so hot and bothered about is known as "greengrocer's apostrophe" because it's so often seen in shops and on market stalls - banana's, apple's, etc.

Oh, hang on a minute - do I mean "greengrocers' apostrophe"? :confused:

[KateHL]

I think the fact that she misleads people to believe she has a master's in English is indeed relevant. Even though English and psychic woo are unrelated, it lends a level of credibility to her in the eyes of some who may not otherwise believe. It just has the added benefit of being humorous to those of us who are already on this side of the argument.

[Starrman]

I've seen worse mistakes done by reporters. Even on StopSylvia.com there have been some amusing mistakes with spelling and grammar that were corrected by the visitors, and yet no one would hint that Robert isn't educated enough.

If all the Sylvia debunking was a TV show, I would say that this thread has just jumped the shark.

Dude - it is not a typo. She spelled out the error to make sure you wouldn't miss how dumb she is.

What is even funnier, is that she didn't put the apostraphe in when she typed it initially, but spelled it out after. So the typo she made actually made the word correct!

[DJM]

What is even funnier, is that she didn't put the apostraphe in when she typed it initially, but spelled it out after. So the typo she made actually made the word correct!

I think it was a recorded podcast.

[Starrman]

I think it was a recorded podcast.

Gotcha.

Either way - you can't compare typos that have been made and corrected with this, since she spelled out the error.

[DJM]

Well, I'm still not sure it's actually an error, since I've found the same spelling in a few articles and even in a book description. Usually book descriptions are read by many people, including the author, editor and publisher. So I find it strange that everyone missed that mistake, since obviously they know a thing or two about correct English and take it seriously.

Which leads me to the conclusion this might be just another way to spell that word in English. Like I've said before, sometimes the apostrophe has other meanings when foreign words are involved.

[RSLancastr]

Well, I'm still not sure it's actually an error, since I've found the same spelling in a few articles and even in a book description. Usually book descriptions are read by many people, including the author, editor and publisher. So I find it strange that everyone missed that mistake, since obviously they know a thing or two about correct English and take it seriously.The book description is for a self-published, or "vanity press" book, printed by this outfit (http://www2.xlibris.com/requestkit/index.asp?src=goo&gkw=[xlibris+corporation]&gclid=CPb34Z-1o5ACFScXagodE3YR7A). I would guess that the description was written by the author himself. And, it being a self-published book, that would likely make him the editor and publisher as well.

By the way, if you go to Amazon.com and look at Browne's own book Secrets and Mysteries of the World (http://www.amazon.com/Secrets-Mysteries-World-Sylvia-Browne/dp/1401904580/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1197485856&sr=8-1), and use the "Search Inside!" feature to search for the word "tulpa", you will see several insances of the plural, none of which use the apostrophe.

Which leads me to the conclusion this might be just another way to spell that word in English.Doesn't look like it from here.

[TX50]

Maybe Francine spells it like that.

Maybe Francine is Dutch.

ETA: Plurals of words of foreign origin take "'s" in Dutch:

eg. Taxi's (from the French word "taximetre"),
pinda's (from the Indonesian word for "peanut"),
tulpa's (some made up psychic nonsense)

[Prometheus]

One word for all youse folks:
Hawai'i

I am told that that is the preferred spelling.
so, tulpa's is not necessarily possesive.
it's part of the word.

The use of an apostrophe in "Hawai'i" is, however, a convention which was adopted to draw attention to the fact that in the original language, which had no written form until it was transcribed by English-speaking missionaries, all vowels are pronounced independently. "Hawai'i" is properly pronounced with four syllables, not three.

With the Tibetan word, "tulpas", no such convention applies.

[bjb]

By the way, if you go to Amazon.com and look at Browne's own book Secrets and Mysteries of the World (http://www.amazon.com/Secrets-Mysteries-World-Sylvia-Browne/dp/1401904580/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1197485856&sr=8-1), and use the "Search Inside!" feature to search for the word "tulpa", you will see several insances of the plural, none of which use the apostrophe.

I checked and sure enough, 'tulpas' is used several times in Sylvia's book. At least her ghostwriter knows how to spell.

[RSL's better half]

DJM, Sylvia isn't speaking Tibetan; she's speaking in English, and the only time "tulpa's" is correct in English is when one is attempting to say "tulpa is" or indicate that the tulpa is in possession of something. I'm pretty sure I learned the apostrophe rule in grade school, and I don't have the Master's degree in English that Sylvia claims to have. As was pointed out earlier, just because other people spell the word wrong doesn't make them correct, and a person with a Master's degree in English is expected to know at least the basics.

It may be a small thing, but the fact that it is a small thing makes it even stranger that Sylvia, if she had such a degree, wouldn't know the difference. All the small things add up, and Sylvia has not only failed to produce evidence that she has this degree, but she consistently does this type of thing, which does make it funny. Robert, I think an article on the "best of" these one day would be great.

Well put. And I agree that it may further the cause for suspicion that she has lied about the MA to list some of her spelling and grammar mistakes, perhaps at the end of the SSB article about this claim. However, I believe the majority of SB fans do not have an MA in English so I'm not sure they'd know the difference. I dunno. Let's see what my guy thinks.

[Hokulele]

The use of an apostrophe in "Hawai'i" is, however, a convention which was adopted to draw attention to the fact that in the original language, which had no written form until it was transcribed by English-speaking missionaries, all vowels are pronounced independently. "Hawai'i" is properly pronounced with four syllables, not three.

With the Tibetan word, "tulpas", no such convention applies.


Nitpick, the apostrophe (') in Hawai'ian is called an 'okina and is an actual letter in the strictest sense of the word. It is pronounced as a glottal stop, such as you would put in the word (phrase?) uh-oh. Written Hawai'ian uses two diacritical marks, the 'okina (glottal stop), and the kahakou (indicating a vowel with added emphasis).

The 'okina is not just to indicate separation of sounds, but an added, although unvoiced, sound. For example, the word kae means waste, excrement, or scorn. This is very different from the word ka'e, which means border or edge. They are pronounced differently.

For someone who wants to speak Hawai'ian in a strictly proper manner, Hawai'i is actually five syllables. Most people don't bother. ;)

[RSLancastr]

For someone who wants to speak Hawai'ian in a strictly proper manner, Hawai'i is actually five syllables. Most people don't bother. ;)A glottal stop is considered a syllable? I wasn't aware of that.

Many posts here are on the ka'e of kae.

[Hokulele]

A glottal stop is considered a syllable? I wasn't aware of that.


In spoken Hawai'ian it is considered as such, you can see this in the structure of some of their formal chants. I don't know about English.

Many posts here are on the ka'e of kae.


And some may be a bit beyond. ;)

[JoeTheJuggler]

The glottal stop is not the syllable. It's actually a consonant sound--that is, it can separate two syllables. Hokule, don't you mean it's actually 4 syllables (rather than the more common three syllable pronunciation of Hawaii), with each of the four vowels in separate syllables?


However, I believe the majority of SB fans do not have an MA in English so I'm not sure they'd know the difference.
I sure hope it doesn't take a Master's in English to know how to use apostrophes properly. I thought that was something I learned in elementary school.

[RSL's better half]

I sure hope it doesn't take a Master's in English to know how to use apostrophes properly. I thought that was something I learned in elementary school.

I should really learn to be more careful about how I phrase what I'm trying to say.

[waltdakind]

Feel it, sure. But trumpeting it on the streetcorner makes one look like one has an biased anti-Sylvia agenda rather than a commitment to fact and reason.


No, it is a silly mistake. Let's not go overboard.


Yes, it is. Given the number of spelling and punctuation errors I see in the newspaper, magazines and even published books- made by people who are supposed to be professional wordsmiths- this is a non-issue.

DJM has got the truth of it.
It would be a silly mistake if I made it, since I don't claim to possess an advanced degree in English, but when someone who regularly lies about her qualifications, abilities and genuine good will is caught doing such a thing, it is positively hilarious.


Even though this may be an open forum, it would certainly seem that the predominant posters (and lurkers too, I would guess) are skeptics. I do not mind admitting a bias against someone who has outright lied to so many people for so long, I am not attempting to argue that she is a fraud or that she is not a true psychic, reading elsewhere or most notably at StopSylviaBrowne will demonstrate that better than I ever could. I accept that she is a fraud as a given at this point and posting it in this forum is hardly anywhere near trumpeting it on a street corner.