| From: | Roger Mills <romilly@...> |
|---|---|
| Date: | Sunday, January 14, 2001, 4:37 |
Steg Belsky wrote:>Unless it was "phat" with a PH! >Which would actually fit _Pat_ better, i'd think. >She could write it Phat with the H being superscript or something...>"Phat" did not exist in English in 1972. O tempora, o mores!