Re: White Coat Day
- From: "Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle_uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 20:15:35 +0100
Skitt wrote:
Mike Lyle wrote:[...]
J. J. Lodder wrote:
<blmblm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[...]your posts appear to be a kind of free verse -- but
I'm really curious about whether this is deliberate on your part,
or an artifact of your newsreader [...]
It's not an artifact.
Others should see the same,
Funny,
how "artefact"
has changed not only its meaning
but even
its spelling.
Well,
not funny at all, really:
I think it's sad.
I
suppose it's far too late
to set up separate meanings
for the
-e-
and
-i-
versions.
*Artefact* is
a chiefly British variant
of *artifact*,
says M-W Online.
"Artefact" is a slightly strange truncation, I suppose; but truncating
it _and_ swapping in the dative instead of the ablative makes "artifact"
even odder. But the shift in meaning is more interesting.
--
Mike.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: White Coat Day
- From: blmblm
- Re: White Coat Day
- References:
- White Coat Day
- From: Richard Maurer
- Re: White Coat Day
- From: Roland Hutchinson
- Re: White Coat Day
- From: tony cooper
- Re: White Coat Day
- From: Mike M
- Re: White Coat Day
- From: Oleg Lego
- Re: White Coat Day
- From: Peter Moylan
- Re: White Coat Day
- From: J. J. Lodder
- Re: White Coat Day
- From: blmblm
- Re: White Coat Day
- From: J. J. Lodder
- Re: White Coat Day
- From: Mike Lyle
- Re: White Coat Day
- From: Skitt
- White Coat Day
- Prev by Date: Re: A rosé by any other name
- Next by Date: Re: the Latin model [WAS: Shall gods be said to ...]
- Previous by thread: Re: White Coat Day
- Next by thread: Re: White Coat Day
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|