|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,027
old hand
|
old hand
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,027 |
Mildly astonished by the waves created in these august circles by the use of to composit, I should like to hypothesize that if to compose is allowed to descend from to pose then why shouldn't posit give birth to composit?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,346
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,346 |
why shouldn't posit give birth to composit?Good point, wsieb. Hang on, wouldn't posit imply a noun representing something that had been posited, i.e. a positition ? That's where I have to start  ing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,204
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,204 |
I had not thought of this provenance for the term - in all of the Tu conferences that I have attended, the word used was "compositE", which, I assumed, referred to the fact that a number of similar motions were amalgamated into one which combined the worst features of all of them.
(pardon my cynicism - it's a common disease among those who have moved in TU circles for anything over twenty years)
But I can see merit in wseib's approach - and it is certainly more elegant.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,004
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,004 |
Hang on, wouldn't posit imply a noun representing something that had been posited, i.e. a positition ?
Or presumably (too obviously?), simply a position?
Speaking of awful regularisations, any opinion on burgle versus the americanoregularisationalistic burglarise ?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,346
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,346 |
>wouldn't posit imply a noun representing something that had been posited, i.e. a positition ?
Or presumably (too obviously?), simply a position?
But position derives from pose rather than posit, no?
It can't derive from both. Or maybe it can.
Oh, I give up!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,004
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,004 |
I hadn't noticed that wsieb's note had dropped the final 'e'. Elegant it may be, but if there's no infinitive version in evidence (look up the corpus dammit), then it ain't a word.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,204
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,204 |
When has that ever been a bar to its use in this forum?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,065
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,065 |
Technically speaking, burglarise is a back-formation, like "edit", which derived from "editor" rather than the other way round. I agree it's an ugly and unnecessary one.
Bingley
Bingley
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 347
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 347 |
"Burgle" is such a lovely-sounding word; it would be a pity to replace it with "burglarize". Mind you, it's a waste to apply it to house-breaking - it should be used for something more onomatopoeically appropriate than the sound of breaking glass and splintering wood!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
Just realized why 'burgle' sounds so ridiculous to me-- it makes me think of a bugle gurgling. 
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,328
Members9,182
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
1,273
guests, and
0
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
