Re: Foxes, bibles
From: Keith Edgerley (edgerley.kj_at_bluewin.ch)
Date: 07/27/04
- Next message: Alexander Magidow: "Re: Binary Search Tree input question"
- Previous message: Harlan Messinger: "Re: Rise of Mongol Power"
- In reply to: Brian M. Scott: "Re: Foxes, bibles"
- Next in thread: John Atkinson: "Re: Foxes, bibles"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 16:40:28 +0200
"Brian M. Scott" <b.scott@csuohio.edu> wrote in message
news:1gdj180x61wwb.14dc15472aygz$.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 14:21:08 +0200 Keith Edgerley
> <edgerley.kj@bluewin.ch> wrote in
> <news:4104f722$1_1@news.bluewin.ch> in sci.lang:
>
> > "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> > news:410452A0.675F@worldnet.att.net...
>
> >> Keith Edgerley wrote:
>
> >>> Cf. old French goupil, from latin vulpes.
>
> >> Dissimilation _and_ metathesis! Maltese didn't go that far.
>
> > I thought you might fall for that. [...]
>
> Oh, so the statement was *deliberately* misleading.
No, I just wondered whether to explain where the "l" of vulpes had gone, and
that the final "l" had nothing to do with it, then decided it wasn't worth
it.
Clearly it would have been.
-- Keith Edgerley owe war sint verswunden alliu miniu jar
- Next message: Alexander Magidow: "Re: Binary Search Tree input question"
- Previous message: Harlan Messinger: "Re: Rise of Mongol Power"
- In reply to: Brian M. Scott: "Re: Foxes, bibles"
- Next in thread: John Atkinson: "Re: Foxes, bibles"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|