Husband and I were discussing this when walking George the other day. I said, 'I add 10 and take away 1.'
Husband agreed that, although he thought he just added 9, he was probably subconsciously adding 10 and taking away 1.
'Unless,' I said, 'I'm adding it to a number ending in 5 then I add 5 and 4. Or if it's to a number ending in 0 then it's easy.'
Husband patted me on the shoulder.
Later we talked about spelling. I'm a good speller except when it comes to double letters; Husband claims it was only the invention of the computer spellchecker that enabled him to progress upwards in the civil service.
On an episode of QI recently another claim was made: that the rule of i before e except after c is broken more often than it is abided by. Twenty-one times more in fact. Stephen Fry showed some examples such as species and glacier and being and weird. I could just about get that the first two were breaking the rule but the last two just threw me - as they did the members of the QI team, in particular Lee Mack. 'But there's no c!'
As I explained to Husband, - who naturally understood Mr Fry's argument perfectly - for me, the rule is about the c not about the i and the e. But it seems even then, as illustrated, it can't be trusted. And if you can't trust i before e except after c what can you rely on?
It's a very funny clip if you haven't seen it. Or even if you have.