[Lexicog] Another lexical gap

[Wayne Leman]

Steve, I didn't do it deliberately, as you did it. I did it deliberately
because I thought it was the right meaning (I didn't grow up where
"standard" English was spoken), until my wife informed me otherwise. So now
I continue to use the word, but assure the person that I like to include
more people as part of my "relatives." I still feel confused about the
"right" definition and prefer to use bro/sis-in-law to include the spouses
of my wife's siblings. I wonder how many others do this also? If enough do,
I assume there needs to be a new sense placed in the English dictionary.

Wayne
-----
Wayne Leman
Cheyenne website: http://www.geocities.com/cheyenne_language

----- Original Message -----
From: <fieldworks_support at sil.org>
To: <lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 7:18 AM
Subject: Re: [Lexicog] Another lexical gap


> In the area of "brother/sister in law", I've deliberately chosen to
> disobey
> the dictionary definition and include the spouses of my wife's siblings as
> brothers and sisters-in-law.
>
>
> Steve White, Jaars language software support



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
In low income neighborhoods, 84% do not own computers.
At Network for Good, help bridge the Digital Divide!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/EA3HyD/3MnJAA/79vVAA/HKE4lB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->


Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lexicographylist/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    lexicographylist-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/