|
Post by ErrolC on Jan 3, 2022 15:20:03 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by errolmartyn on Jan 3, 2022 16:14:15 GMT 12
Any author who writes of 'Defense' (also in the title of the book) in a New Zealand and Australian inter-war context doesn't convey much attention to research. Presumably he'd be happy with a book about the attack on Pearl 'Harbour'! Errol
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 6, 2022 7:49:42 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by errolmartyn on Jan 6, 2022 10:46:31 GMT 12
". . . the constant use of the American spelling of defense was frustrating, especially where it was inserted in direct quotes from British and Commonwealth politicians and military personnel of the time where defence would have been used. . . . The overall review of the book notwithstanding, in light of the above observations one is left wondering as to the accuracy of the rendition of the other quotes throughout.
Errol
|
|
|
Post by typerated on Jan 6, 2022 14:30:44 GMT 12
". . . the constant use of the American spelling of defense was frustrating, especially where it was inserted in direct quotes from British and Commonwealth politicians and military personnel of the time where defence would have been used. . . . Errol It is written by an American - of course he spells it like that! You have a comically petty complaint!
|
|
|
Post by errolmartyn on Jan 6, 2022 15:01:52 GMT 12
". . . the constant use of the American spelling of defense was frustrating, especially where it was inserted in direct quotes from British and Commonwealth politicians and military personnel of the time where defence would have been used. . . . Errol It is written by an American - of course he spells it like that! You have a comically petty complaint! Sorry, I should have made it clear that the quote in my post is that of the reviewer, not me, though of course as a serious researcher and writer I am in agreement with it! Errol
|
|