Dan wrote:
>
> "Chris Croughton" <chris@keristor.net> wrote in message
> news:slrneds3hv.3jv.chris@ccserver.keris.net...
> > On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 04:12:20 GMT, Dan
> > <DELETEMEdan_slaughter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >
> >> You write very well for a non-native writer. Yes, "dead battery" is
> >> perfectly acceptable, and, in the United States, would be the term most
> >> widely accepted. One would find the term "flat battery" foreign. We
> >> would
> >> understand, but we would know that it was written by a person whose
> >> native
> >> tongue isn't English. Other more technical (but boring and unnatural)
> >> terms
> >> include "(fully) discharged battery" or "unserviceable battery."
> >
> > To me an "unserviceable" battery would be one which is useless, not
> > capable of being recharged. I still often write the UK forces
> > abbreviation "U/S" (for "unserviceable") on equipment which is not only
> > 'dead' but which cannot be revived (although sometimes it can be
> > rebuilt, more often it is destined for the scrap pile).
> >
>
> unserviceable
Who knows? Might be rechargeable.
--
Remove "antispam" and ".invalid" for e-mail address.
"He that giveth to the poor lendeth to the Lord, and shall be repaid,"
said Mrs Fairchild, hastily slipping a shilling into the poor woman's
hand.
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
|