Snow flurry, tipping from a clear blue sky

while topical (or it was 4 minutes ago) is actually a whimsical, poetic heading that has absolutely NOTHING to do with what I was intending to write whatsoever. Sorry.

_______________________

I was listening to the radio this morning.

This is not unusual. Nor, in itself, a very good story, I must admit.

In fact, travelling – as you have – from the title of this post to the revelation that I, like millions of others, was listening to the radio this morning, you might feel disappointed. And justifiably so. I mean, if you click on a link, or perhaps log into your RSS feed, and are faced with a heading involving an apparent transmodic, poetic juxtoposition, and then confronted only seconds later by a post that declares itself to be doggedly, almost morbidly mundane, I would argue that you have every right to feel disappointed. Let down. Upset.

Some might even argue that you might arguably be in a position to demand your money back.

I, however, would argue that you havent paid any money. So. Right then.

__________________________________

I was listening to the radio this morning. In the mornings, I listen to BBC Radio Five. Or Five. Or Five live. Or whatever the hell its called. That one that does mainly sport, but in the mornings, after their apocolyptically bad breakfast show starring that man who used to be on Radio One and think he was hip and is now on Five Live and thinks hes clever, they do phone-ins about topical subjects from the world of current affairs. And I listen to it.

This is my general practice, mainly because not to listen to that would mean retuning the three radios that are on simultaniously – and certainly not because I like to listen to the incredibly repetitive whiny phone-ins that are the standard fare at that time in the morning. I dont. Well, I do, but only because listening to them means I get to shout at stupid people.

I will have a proper rant about these damnable phone-ins another time, with a better heading that wont make you depressed and aggrieved at having to read it. But in the meantime I had one simple question.

This morning, whining about the NHS, a man kept using the word tret. He used it once:

But if thats how people get tret, what do you expect?

And I thought Id misheard him.

Then he used it three times in quick succession.

I couldnt believe I was tret that way. I was tret with contempt, and if people are tret like that, they dont like it

Well frankly, I can well imagine they dont like it. Its completely ungrammatical.

Or is it me? Is tret (as past tense of treat, used rather than treated) a word?

Seriously – is it? Am I missing a word?

Is tret a word?