On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 15:43:08 +0200, Martin wrote:

On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 14:03:36 +0100, Stephen Howard
wrote:

On Sat, 9 Oct 2004 08:28:00 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"
wrote:


"Stephen Howard" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 21:46:31 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"
wrote:


"Stephen Howard" wrote in message
.. .

[snip]

You might have to spend a week doing this, but it will decimate
the
population to such an extent that a weekly patrol will probably
be
adequate.

There is only one extent to which a population can be decimated,
namely to kill off one in every ten.
That leaves 90% fighting fit.
{:-((

There's always one...

http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~brians/errors/decimate.html

Interesting.
I suppose it is futile to think that words may retain their
definitions when there are so many ignorant wordsmiths bandying them
about.


And that points up your misconception that language is static in
nature.

I thoroughly recommend a book called Mother Tongue, by Bill Bryson.
Should you ever read it I think you'll be appalled to find that you're
just as guilty as the next 'ignorant wordsmith' when it comes to
twisting definitions - and you'll also discover that many of your
linguistic tenets have extremely suspect origins ( such as the
venerable OED ).

Bill Bryson is a more reliable authority, than the compilers of the
OED? Not in my opinion.

Martin, remind me... there's about a page and a half on words of Dutch
origin in there... did he get any of it right? I remember tootling
acceptingly through the book until I got to that bit and then wondering
just how accurate any of it was.

Liz