Re: Plausibility Check


Peter T. Daniels wrote:

That is not a quote; that is your recollection of what you (think you)
heard (and it is translated as well, but the possibility of distortion
in translation is here minimal).

How many times must I repeat myself? I _is_ a quote,
a direct quote from a brief radio program, 11:40 - 11:45
on DRS 1, and I remember it very accurately, since it was
one of those fine confirmations of an insight of mine from
1974/75, when I not only defined language but statet a
correlation between human made things and words.
Which is the reason why I picked up that sentence,
and why I remember it accurately.

That is not a "source." A source would be the date of the broadcast,
and preferably it would identify the authority for the statement.

It is my source, I got that sentence from that radio
program, and if you don't believe me you can ask them,
as I proposed twice. Why don't you do that instead of
wasting my precious time?

I gave you the link to the website, you
can contact the editors of the Mailbox, I even wrote
a draft of a letter to them. Can you ask for more?

Petrarch wasn't a Renaissance man?

Eras are'nt so clear-cut.

If that number were remotely accurate, as many words would have had to
be lost from English as you claim were added by "information
technology" alone. The counts of words in unabridged dictionaries
include all the terms used in all the sciences and average ca. 500,000
today.

It is not my claim, it's what I quote from that radio program:
English in the time of Shakespeare had 200,000 words,
information technology alone created 200,000 new words.
Plenty of words are missing in my Webster's Unabridged
Dictionary of the English Language. Tell me of an unabridged
dictionary, and I shall mention words missing therein.

Yet you are unable to identify them or state those qualifications.

Linguists from Swiss universities. No qualification?

A very big assumption when it comes to questions of language.

Far out to assume that linguists from universities rely
on publications?

Why are you afraid to consult the OED database?

I told you before that we have the OED in print, the online
version offered by the university library of Zurich is the same
you find online, with no word counting function, but offering
new words such as bouncebackability. And, besides, not
all the English words in Shakespeare's time made it into
the OED, words come and go with crafts, trades, professions.

Franz Gnaedinger

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: observable language change - "off of" makes it to the NY Times
    ... It's not part of my normal English, spoken or written, ... end quote. ... In The New Fowler's Modern English Usage edited by R. W. Burchfield ... can-do spirit etc personality problems? ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Plausibility Check
    ... That is not a quote; that is your recollection of what you ... The counts of words in unabridged dictionaries ... English in the time of Shakespeare had 200,000 words, ... This is the first time you have mentioned "linguists from Swiss ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Quotes, Tilde, Caret Symbol appears only when clicked twice !
    ... Under Text Services and Input Languages -> Settings I changed the ... English (United States) - United States-International ... and striking a quote prints a quote. ...
    (comp.databases.ms-access)
  • Re: =?UTF-8?B?S3J1eml0w7xyY2tlbiE=?=
    ... [translated quote] ... The Kuruc and the Turks laid siege to Vienna. ... English translation:Damn it! ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: Substituting the main menu bar(s)
    ... like everything to be in English, partly because my user guide is in ... But I do not try to do anything about other strings that might be displayed in the language of the operating system. ... You mention one disadvantage of your dictionary to be that each English string can only have one translation. ... But you could get around this by having two dictionaries; one for menu/control text and another for tooltip text. ...
    (microsoft.public.vc.mfc)