Research

[Wilson Gray]

Note that that spellings, "wear" and "where," have not been replaced
by the spelling "were," regardless of how they may be pronounced.

-Wilson

On 11/1/06, Charles Doyle <cdoyle at uga.edu> wrote:
> ---------------------- Information from the mail header -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       Charles Doyle <cdoyle at UGA.EDU>
> Subject:      Re: Research
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Dear Tanya,
>
> Pay close heed to the sagacious remarks of Sally and John Baker!
>
> I wonder if part of the purpose of your assignment is to show you how DIFFICULT (one might almost say impossible) it is to verify impressions about the comparative rarity or commonness of words or usages.
>
> The dictionaries might label a word (or a meaning of a word) "archaic," "rare," or "obsolete."  However, we can never be sure that the word isn't still being used, with whatever degree of frequency, by SOME group of speakers, somewhere.  The lexicographers--especially in earlier times--had to rely on the unscientific observations and the (often sensitive) intuitions of themselves and their consultants.
>
> Now, though, the availability of vast searchable data bases of "text" makes possible a better quality of surmise--but still not anything very definitive, usually.  And effectively searching those data bases involves its own (often arcane) skills.
>
> Be aware, too, that the very concept of a "main-stream" vocabulary is tricky.  Who gets to decide what streams are main?
>
> Best wishes.
>
> Charlie (your neighbor in Athens)
>
> _____________________________________
>
> ---- Original message ----
> >Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 12:37:39 -0600
> >From: Sally Donlon <sod at LOUISIANA.EDU>
> >Subject: Re: Research
> >To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> >
> >Tanya,
> >
> >I don't know of many cognitive linguists who would say that "pants" have replaced "trousers" in American English, but rather that "pants" fills a much more general, and therefore frequent, slot in semantic space. Just yesterday my daughter and I scoured the local shopping mall searching for "trousers," meaning we were trying to find "pants" with a certain set of design features:  that clasped at one's actual waist, had a zippered fly, were full and even rather blouson  through the thighs, and tapered slightly toward the ankle. Virtually every fashion retailer understood what I meant when I used the word "trousers," which we looked for in the "pants" section of the store.
> >
> >sally
> >
> >
> >
> >On Nov 1, 2006, at 11:16 AM, Tanya Boettcher wrote:
> >
> >> I am an English major at Kennesaw State University, and I am in need of some help.  I am in an American English class, and a project for that class is to discover why certain words have seemed to have disappeared in from main stream vocabulary.  For example, most people would say that they were pants instead of trousers.  It is almost as if the word "pants" has replaced the word "trousers."
> >> My problem is that I have no idea were to look for information regarding this phenomenon.  If anybody has any suggestions as to how I might go about researching this project I would truly appreciate it.
> >>
> >>   Thanks,
> >>   Tanya Boettcher
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>


--
Everybody says, "How hard it is that we have to die"---a strange
complaint to come from the mouths of people who have had to live.
-----
Whoever has lived long enough to find out what life is knows how deep
a debt of gratitude we owe to Adam, the first great benefactor of our
race. He brought death into the world.

--Sam Clemens

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org