[Lexicog] archaic entries

[Wayne Leman]

I think that both obsolete and archaic are useful lexicographical categories, but must reflect actual usage of a language community, not the views of a lexicographer working in the abstract.

I understand archaic to refer to a form which is not in use by anyone currently speaking a language. I understand obsolete to refer to a form which is in use by a very small number of speakers of a language and is probably on its way to becoming archaic.

Wayne
-----
Wayne Leman
Cheyenne website: http://www.geocities.com/cheyenne_language
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Andrew Dunbar 
  To: lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 12:45 PM
  Subject: Re: [Lexicog] archaic entries


  It might be worth asking how various people differentiate "archaic" from "obsolete" while we're at it.

  Andrew Dunbar.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lexicography/attachments/20060210/acff3548/attachment.htm>