Re: observable language change - "off of" makes it to the NY Times
- From: Trond Engen <trondnet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 14:00:37 +0200
analyst41@xxxxxxxxxxx skreiv:
Wiily S was only doing dialect when he used "off of".
I suspect that every use of "off of" will be found to be associated with ignorance/lack of education/lack of cultivation.
And you don't see the internal contradiction?
This is sociolinguistically interesting, all right, but not in the way you believe. Your ranting has nothing to do to with the qualities of the language you dislike and all the more with your dislikes of certain qualities of language. I think anyone with some idea of sociolinguistics will have a pretty good idea of what sociological groupings you belong to.
--
Trond Engen
- probably suspected of all sorts of lacks
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
.
- References:
- Re: observable language change - "off of" makes it to the NY Times
- From: analyst41
- Re: observable language change - "off of" makes it to the NY Times
- From: Harlan Messinger
- Re: observable language change - "off of" makes it to the NY Times
- From: Adam Funk
- Re: observable language change - "off of" makes it to the NY Times
- From: analyst41
- Re: observable language change - "off of" makes it to the NY Times
- Prev by Date: Re: observable language change - "off of" makes it to the NY Times
- Next by Date: Re: proof that most etymologies are only fairy-tales
- Previous by thread: Re: observable language change - "off of" makes it to the NY Times
- Next by thread: Re: observable language change - "off of" makes it to the NY Times
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading