Re: White Coat Day
- From: "Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle_uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 21:38:03 +0100
blmblm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
In article <468007ec$0$16347$88260bb3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Mike Lyle <mike_lyle_uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
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.
[ snip ]
*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.
What shift in meaning is that? the one from "product of human
activity" to "product of [something else, such as a newsreader in
this example]"?
Yes: the difference between an intended product and an accidental one is
radical. Not quite one of our treasured autoantitheses, but close.
--
Mike.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: White Coat Day
- From: Al in Dallas
- Re: White Coat Day
- References:
- White Coat Day
- From: Richard Maurer
- Re: White Coat Day
- From: Mike Lyle
- Re: White Coat Day
- From: Skitt
- Re: White Coat Day
- From: Mike Lyle
- Re: White Coat Day
- From: blmblm
- White Coat Day
- Prev by Date: GIG article
- Next by Date: Re: White Coat Day
- Previous by thread: Re: White Coat Day
- Next by thread: Re: White Coat Day
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|