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

From: Somers, Harold (harold.somers@manchester.ac.uk)
Date: Fri Feb 11 2005 - 01:16:57 MET

  • Next message: Yorick WIlks: "Re: [Corpora-List] Lesser (sic) used languages"

    James L. Fidelholtz wrote:
    > 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).

    That's funny. My personal reaction to any marginally acceptable collocation that I personally don't use is that it's American ;-)
     
    A number of posters seem to think that I was somehow attacking someone or something. If "lesser used" is now an extablished term we will just have to learn to live with it, as we have done with "Machine Translation", another terrible misnomer. (And while I am being a grumpy proscriptive recidivist, the use of "gender" to mean "sex"). I just felt that "less" was already a comparative form, but as we all know, language ain't logical. Anyway, back to work on one of the morer used langauges.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 11 2005 - 01:19:13 MET