Re: FLAGSHIP #88 - AD

From: Carol Mulholland <Carol@flagship-uk.demon.co.uk>

Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 00:52:53 +0000

Greg Lindahl wrote:

> We do use it that way. My objection was that his idea of "regular
> posters" of the newsgroup seems awfully small, since I only engage in
> senseless flamewars with a couple of British GMs and a few honorary
> Brits.

Hmm, but there ain't that many regulars...

> As for your taste in dictionaries, I wouldn't use Websters for
> anything.

I've always thought that was the authority for American usage,
though mainly because of the old Hope/Crosby song: 'Like
Websters' dictionary, We're Morocco bound...'

> I prefer the OED, but it's a bit weak for "first usage"
> citations and earlier definitions... check out the definition of
> "punk", and then go look up how Shakespeare uses it.

Seems OK to me? Shakespeare uses it to mean 'whore, strumpet,' etc
and that's how it's defined in OED? Common in C17th literature, but
dies out in the C18th. Better email me if there's more to tell,
though, as I don't suppose it's of general interest. I've always
found OED pretty good for earlier definitions - Eng Lit academics
use it for editing texts. But yes, "first usage" examples do tend
to get out-dated by later research.

Cheers, Carol

References

Re: FLAGSHIP #88 - AD
Carol Mulholland <Carol@flagship-uk.demon.co.uk>
Tue, 19 Dec 2000 20:15:30 +0000
Re: FLAGSHIP #88 - AD
lindahl@pbm.com (Greg Lindahl)
Tue, 19 Dec 2000 21:07:36 +0000