tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2851981677644878233.post4521385719632123817..comments2023-10-25T02:16:28.192-06:00Comments on Ryan's linguistics blog: folk etymologyRyan Denzer-Kinghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04015316224715016479noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2851981677644878233.post-23900937474229864542009-03-29T16:33:00.000-06:002009-03-29T16:33:00.000-06:00Hi Ryan, This is Claire F., a fellow "linguist" fr...Hi Ryan, This is Claire F., a fellow "linguist" from Pius. I ended up getting a linguistics minor in undergrad but decided I couldn't do much with that in the long term...I'm glad to see that doesn't apply to everyone!<BR/><BR/>I actually have been thinking about this a lot, as I'm an engineering grad student without many opportunities for expanding my non-technical English vocabulary. Words that I haven't seen or used in a while tend to be replaced with higher frequency words with similar sounds and meanings. For example, I opt for "diminish" over "demean". Overall I'm finding that my spelling skills have significantly fallen off at the same time!Clairehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15242932642140469464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2851981677644878233.post-1669109829357578432008-01-21T01:07:00.000-07:002008-01-21T01:07:00.000-07:00in most cases, i think that's the problem. there'...in most cases, i think that's the problem. there's something going on mentally when you're thinking about a word as a sound rather than it in written form (as a picture of the text). so, editing doesn't seem to come into play so easily.<BR/><BR/>the nature of a typo, imho, is not an error of the mind, but of motor skills/coordination. you press the wrong keys. it's not cause you suddenly accidentally think "i dno't konw waht tour'e tlakig about." you just are drunk as hell. yes, you DO know what i'm talking about, you silly drunk.riobardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13772326273686427859noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2851981677644878233.post-29701172703934015512008-01-21T00:54:00.000-07:002008-01-21T00:54:00.000-07:00the real question, i think, is what does the speak...the real question, i think, is what does the speaker actually mean. to take up the "should've/should of" debate, for me those two phrases are pronounced identically. i would consider these kinds of errors more as typos than anything; although i do agree that the disburse/disperse thing may be more complex than that.kataikléyahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03642167122943823739noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2851981677644878233.post-90707142440596838122007-10-30T18:57:00.000-06:002007-10-30T18:57:00.000-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.Clairehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15242932642140469464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2851981677644878233.post-3145960818653853622007-10-30T10:47:00.000-06:002007-10-30T10:47:00.000-06:00I think the "should of" vs. "should have" from "sh...I think the "should of" vs. "should have" from "should've" is a prime example of what you're talking about -- misperceiving words based solely on pronunciation, where semantics doesn't enter into it. After all, we do say "should of" in rapid speech, since "should've" does have a little bit of a schwa between the d and v. It makes sense that people would perceive that as "should of" instead of "should have."<BR/><BR/>As for the bursar/pursar question, I wouldn't be too surprised if that happens at some point in the future, though I think it would be less likely that the disburse/disperse switch since the p in pursar would be aspirated, making much more perceptually distinct from the unaspirated, voiced b in bursar.Ryan Denzer-Kinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04015316224715016479noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2851981677644878233.post-89141977966620076102007-10-30T03:50:00.000-06:002007-10-30T03:50:00.000-06:00Similar in meaning, except that it is spread widel...Similar in meaning, except that it is spread widely to one specific location. Maybe they throw the money all around the book store.<BR/><BR/>You ever notice people saying "for all intensive purposes" in stead of "intents and purposes?" Same thing, I think, though the meanings perhaps are a bit more related. Also, I've seen "should of" in stead of "should've." This has a lot to do with simple listening and repeating. Conceiving the meaning of the particulars doesn't necessarily enter into it, it seems. <BR/><BR/>If people change these words as you have so demonstrated, will the job "bursar" be changed to "persar" or "pursar" (maybe people will think it similar to "purse")?riobardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13772326273686427859noreply@blogger.com