| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Even further off-topic, but possibly a lucrative money makerEven further off-topic, but possibly a lucrative money makerPosted Oct 10, 2008 4:47 UTC (Fri) by alfille (subscriber, #1631)In reply to: Even further off-topic, but possibly a lucrative money maker by nix Parent article: Stallman vs. Clouds (Linux Journal)
Actually, Steven Pinker's ¨Words and Meaning¨ points out that irregular verbs are few (<200) but account for 40% of the verbs used in common speach. Essentially, we preparse and cache them, so we don't need the rules.
(Log in to post comments)
Even further off-topic, but possibly a lucrative money maker Posted Oct 10, 2008 8:12 UTC (Fri) by njs (subscriber, #40338) [Link]
That's exactly the problem -- high-frequency words can get away with irregularity, and the higher the frequency the more irregularity they can get away with (is/am/be/are/was/wtf?). But "data" isn't high frequency at all, so speakers are normalizing it to the usual English rules.
Even further off-topic, but possibly a lucrative money maker Posted Oct 11, 2008 2:50 UTC (Sat) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
The English title of this book is _Words and Rules_.
|
|
||||||||||||