Re: [Corpora-List] Google searches as linguistic evidence

From: Fanny Meunier (fanny.meunier@uclouvain.be)
Date: Thu Dec 07 2006 - 13:50:30 MET

  • Next message: Diana Maynard: "Re: [Corpora-List] Google searches as linguistic evidence"

    Hi there,

    Your question puzzled me and I googled "a
    worshop" (7840000 hits) vs "an workshop" (21500 hits).

    It struck me that they were quite a lot of German refs such as
    Sie bitte an workshop@... (= sthg like: please see workshop@...)
    schicken Sie bitte eine Email an workshop (= sthg
    like: please send an e-mail to workshop@...)
    direkt per E-Mail an workshop@... (= directly via e-mail to workshop@...)

    Food for thought...

    All the best,
    Fanny

    Le 13:13 7/12/2006,Diana Maynard écrit:
    >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    >
    >No problem, it was my fault for being too hasty also.
    >I agree entirely.
    >Another little story....
    >
    >A non-English colleague asked me the other day
    >if the correct phrase was "a workshop" or "an
    >workshop". I was quite surprised at the
    >question, especially as the colleague said he
    >had searched for both on Google as he was not
    >sure which to use, and found more occurrences of
    >the former, but still many occurrences of the
    >latter. He also said that to him the
    >pronunciation of the latter sounded better
    >(which I found odd as I actually found it quite
    >difficult to pronounce, but perhaps that's a non-native speaker thing).
    >I checked on Google and he was right about the occurrences.
    >
    >Are there any times when it would be OK to use
    >"an" before a word beginning with "w"?
    >I'd be interested to know what the BNC or other corpora show up on that.
    >Diana
    >
    >
    >Ramesh Krishnamurthy wrote:
    >>Hi Diana
    >>Sorry about the brevity of my previous email.
    >>I didn't mean to be rude, just in a hurry as usual...
    >>
    >>But I was raising a genuine concern of mine. An
    >>experience last year: challenged in
    >>my daughter's school playground by 2 mothers
    >>who had heard of my involvement with
    >>writing dictionaries, I was asked to resolve
    >>their dispute: "is unpunctual a word, can I
    >>say unpunctual".
    >>
    >>It was not listed in any of the printed 6 or 7 native-speaker (US and UK) and
    >>learner's dictionaries I looked at. There were
    >>15 occurrences in Bank of English (5 in British
    >>Magazines, 4 in Independent, and a few
    >>one-offs), so below the normal threshold for inclusion
    >>in Cobuild at the time.
    >>
    >>But I found 4320 hits on Google (43,100 today!
    >>- so has its usage increased, or has Google's
    >>trawl just got bigger?), *mostly entries in
    >>online dictionaries (based on each other?)*...
    >>but also 9000+ for impunctual, 5000 for non-punctual,
    >>500 for nonpunctual, 400 for contrapunctual, 11
    >>for apunctual, and 7 for anti-punctual...
    >>
    >>When I looked closer at the hits, most of the
    >>hits for impunctual were from a 1913 USA dictionary,
    >>most of the hits for non(-)punctual were
    >>(technical use) from linguistics texts, and
    >>most hits for contrapunctual were from music texts.
    >>
    >>So I told the mothers that unpunctual was a valid word form
    >>(ie created according to valid derivational rules)
    >>but that it wasn't very widely used.
    >>
    >>PS I've just noticed a discussion on unpunctual at
    >>http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=105391
    >>
    >>Best
    >>Ramesh
    >>
    >>
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Dec 07 2006 - 13:48:23 MET