[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "cumulated" or "accumulated"
From: |
John Cowan |
Subject: |
Re: "cumulated" or "accumulated" |
Date: |
Mon, 7 Feb 2011 20:03:22 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
Bob Proulx scripsit:
> Like "kempt" and "couth" I only assume exist because "unkempt" and
> "uncouth" exist. But I never hear them used. :-)
"Kempt" now appears in the more regular form of "combed".
> Flammable, inflammable.
"Inflammable" is the original word, meaning "capable of bursting into
flames." It was changed to "flammable" on the sides of fuel trucks
because, as Quine says, semi-literacy should not be a capital offense.
> The very fact that you and I are on completely opposite sides of this
> observation tells me that the use is problematic and should be avoided
> regardless of whether either is correct or incorrect.
Quite so. I would change it to "combined", since that
is the clearly relevant meaning of those listed at
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cumulate .
--
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan address@hidden
Would your name perchance be surname Puppet, given name Sock?
--Rick Moen