‘Translation’ assistance request

I’m working my way through Gertrude Beers’ and Letha Scott’s excellent “Fundamental Drills in Gregg Shorthand”, and I’ve just been stumped.  Could someone please assist me with the following line:
p. 114, 5th and 4th lines up from bottom of page: “We can be with you to act on the finance committee TESTD your(?) name(?).”  I can’t make sense of it…

(by A for


10 comments Add yours
  1. Me, too. Your query prompted me to pull out the Manual. Check Page 94 of the Anniversary Manual, Paragraph 171. Phrasing Principles. Bottom of qst column and top of second — early reply AND at an early date. Seems to me that "at the earliest date" came up before about a year or so ago. It may have been my question back then. Anyway, our moderator knew the answer.

  2. Cool. Thanks for the reference. The abbreviation for "at the earliest date" makes good sense to me. I understand the reasoning behind the abbreviation for "at an early date" (omit indefinite article; sense still clear). Had I not been reminded of the form, though, I would have been strongly inclined to write "at an" with a TN blend. It strikes me as no more economical to write the phrase as it appears in the Anniv. Manual; moreover, a form with a TN blend would be more immediately recognizable (thus requiring less memory load). I'd be curious to know if there's a strong reason for prefering the word-omission ("an") shortcut phrasing rule in this instance, instead of the word blending ("at an" ~ TN) rule, or if its pretty much 6 of one half a dozen of the other.

  3. For experienced shorthand writers, this forum 40 or 60 ears later replaces all the input from users and teachers which used to be published in The Gregg Writer. Like others, my base system is Anniversary but I've adopted pre-Ann and reporting shortcuts. They seem very logical and usuay can be assimilated quickly with a little practice. I hope these phrases don't put off "newbies" who are struggling with Simplified or DJS … but after all these years of using Gregg I am convinced the Anniversary version is best unless you only want to learn shorthand for personal note taking. The basic Anniversary learning books are available at extremely reasonable prices on Amazon and eBay. But it is difficult for a beginner without the strict structure of a classroom to absorb all the briefs, abbreviating principle application and phrasing presented in the books. Beginners who want to learn Anniversary are clearly better off starting with the 2-volume functional Manual crafted by Leslie. That's my opinion, others may contest it freely without offending me.

  4. I contest that opinion!!! I learned from the basic manual that is available on gregg.angelfishy.net and found it perfectly sufficient to learn if you also use "Fundamental Drills" also on that website to add reading material. The combination of these two books, freely available on this website allows anyone to learn with enough practice to absorb the brief forms well.

  5. Of course. I was mistaken not to note that "an" not being represented by N is reason enough for Anniversary not to allow the TN blend to express "at an". I was thinking, rather, that as a personal add-on to anniversary phrase abbreviation practices, TN strikes me as both economical and sensible (albeit, for the reason you state, inelegant). Not that I plan on adopting it…

  6. Piqueroi is absolutely right: the Functional Method manual (2-volume set) is sufficient to learn Anniversary well (as opposed to using the regular manual + fundamental drills). I don't recommend learning Anniversary from the regular manual even though it's free, students tend to forget the principles more easily, the manual doesn't really provide the constant reinforcement and drilling that Anniversary (and Pre-Anniversary) requires to deal with the "memory load", and students don't have the discipline to switch books to pick up what the other book says. I use it for reference purposes only. With the regular manual, you really need an instructor to force you to go back in the lesson, and drill the principles. In the absence of an instructor, students learning on their own in general usually do not reread material, and naively believe that they really know the lessons when they move forward to the next, because they are concentrating on writing shorthand before knowing how to read it. The Functional Method avoids all of that, by the reinforcement provided with the length of the reading selections, keeping the knowledge fresh and testing your knowledge of the vocabulary constantly by making you read before you write. Plus, the real advantage is that it introduces far more vocabulary than the regular manual and the Fundamental Drills combined, all in one book. After studying from the Functional Method manual, reading the fundamental drills is a walk in the park, due to the constant reinforcement of forms.

    A lot of questions that we get in the forum, especially phrasing questions and vocabulary, are in part due to the ambiguity of the manual, and also due to going forward in the manual without learning the lessons well. Students learning from the regular manual by themselves tend to skim over the lessons without internalizing the principles. With the Functional Method manual, the likelihood of that happening is less, because each lesson has lots of reading material, a lot being interesting reading selections, which really forces you to learn the principles.

    It is no wonder that ensuing series took after the format of the Functional Method manual to create the learning books. In my opinion, if you learn from the regular manual, you really need the fundamental drills, and Gregg Speed Studies to make you somewhat proficient. The Functional Method is sufficient to learn Anniversary, without the rest of the books (though the other books will serve as a good reinforcement!).

Leave a Reply