[Corpora-List] Re: Lesser (sic) used languages

• Previous message: Steven Bird: "Re: [Corpora-List] How much linguistic resources exist for contemporary languages?"
• In reply to: Somers, Harold: "[Corpora-List] Lesser (sic) used languages"
• Next in thread: Danilo Giampiccolo: "RE: [Corpora-List] Lesser (sic) used languages"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hi, Harold,

Just googled the two, and while that is pretty rough and ready, "lesser
used" got just over 50,000 hits, while "less used" got a bit over 100,000
(including collocations like "buy for less--used ..."). The implication
being that only about two-thirds of Web posters at most might cringe like
you. My personal reaction is that it is British, but I would say that about
any marginally acceptable collocation that I personally don't use ('Blame
the Brits' syndrome).

Jim

Somers, Harold escribió:

> Sorry for cross-posting, but I just saw an announcement for a conference on "Lesser Used Languages & Computer Linguistics", which looks like an interesting conference, but (the point of this posting), does anyone else cringe when they see "lesser used"? Shouldn't it be "less used"?
>
>
>
 

James L. Fidelholtz
Posgrado en Ciencias del Lenguaje, ICSyH
Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla MÉXICO

• Next message: Susan Schreibman: "[Corpora-List] CFP: Computers and Literature Discussion Group, Modern Language Association Conference"
• Previous message: Steven Bird: "Re: [Corpora-List] How much linguistic resources exist for contemporary languages?"
• In reply to: Somers, Harold: "[Corpora-List] Lesser (sic) used languages"
• Next in thread: Danilo Giampiccolo: "RE: [Corpora-List] Lesser (sic) used languages"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Feb 10 2005 - 23:00:20 MET