Conversion by truncation (Wa Re: No "damage"?)

Wilson Gray hwgray at GMAIL.COM
Tue Sep 13 15:40:29 UTC 2011

On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 8:25 AM, Jonathan Lighter
<wuxxmupp2000 at> wrote:
> But the difference is that "collateral," n., already has a well-recognized
> meaning, making the truncated "collateral (damage)" seem semantically weird.

I'm not crazy?!

Thank you, Jon!

All say, "How hard it is that we have to die!"---a strange complaint
to come from the mouths of people who have had to live.
-Mark Twain

The American Dialect Society -

More information about the Ads-l mailing list