ah/ awe

[Baker, John]

Similarly, in corporate law a "merger" involves the absorption of one or more corporations or other business entities by another.  To "merge with" means only that the entity is a party to the merger; to "merge into" means it is not the surviving party.  If the entities instead are to be combined by dissolving the existing entities and creating a new one, that is a "consolidation."
 
 
John Baker
 

________________________________

From: American Dialect Society on behalf of Laurence Horn
Sent: Mon 10/2/2006 12:14 AM
To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: ah/ awe



At 11:57 PM -0400 10/1/06, Alice Faber wrote:
>Tom Zurinskas wrote:
>>>From: Alice Faber <faber at HASKINS.YALE.EDU>
>>
>>>But it *is* a merger, by the definition of a merger. One language state
>>>with two contrasting sounds develops into a state in which there is only
>>>one.
>>OK.  Special meaning.  The alligator ate the dog.  They had a merger:)
>>Seems to me a better term than merger here would be apropriate if its
>>really
>>a takeover not a merger.
>
>Well, I'd call it a technical term within the discipline of linguistics.

Right, but not that different from the discipline of traffic
patterns; last time I merged onto a highway, my lane disappeared.  Or
should we stop talking about merging traffic and talk about lane
takeovers instead?

LH

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

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