RE: [tlug] [REMINDER] "Defending the Creative Commons"

["Brett Robson" <Brett.Robson@example.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dboudrea@example.com [mailto:dboudrea@example.com]

> Did he have a tendency to over-enunciate (in a 
> concerted effort to be
> more clear, of course)?  I had a professor in college like that.
> 

Yes he did a bit, and he did sound a little bit patronizing at times, but I put this down to him being fairly passionate and also not really knowing who he was presenting to. 



> >(It did annoy me that he continually used 'architect' as a 
> verb, he even said
> >"architect the design" at one stage. But fortunately he 
> didn't conjugate it, eg
> >architected, architecting, >architection)
> >
> >Brett
> 
> Hey what's wrong with that, even if someone were to conjugate 
> it?  

Because I know what an architect is, someone who *designs* buildings, (or perhaps architects architecture), but I don't know what "to architect" means. Everytime he mentions "to architect" I'm thinking of two guys in hat hats carrying blue prints. Of course I can work it out, but in making up words he has made communication more difficult. "To architect" might be similar to "to engineer", as you can also say "to nurse" is the job of a nurse. But "to doctor" is not what a doctor is supposed to do and although vet may do some vetting.

I understand my girlfriend when she confuses 'a' and 'the', and gets countable nouns completely screwed (she has many money), but my mother doesn't understand her. We rely on a commonality for understanding, you can just make stuff up.

Most modern developments are actually making English less useful rather than more useful.

> 
> Winston Churchill spoke about another stupid rule like this, 
> about the rule that
> says you can't end a sentence with a preposition, and he 
> replied something like
> "That is the kind of English up with which I will not put."  

I don't agree with that rule but he could have said "That is the kind of English I will endure."