clarke@csri.toronto.edu (Jim Clarke) (08/30/89)
In article <KIM.89Aug30040428@watsup.waterloo.edu> kim@watsup.waterloo.edu (T. Kim Nguyen) writes: >In article <422@maytag.waterloo.edu> giguere@aries5.uucp (Eric Giguere) writes: > > In article <2587@gandalf.UUCP> edlee@gandalf.UUCP (Ed Lee) writes: (Previous discussion: Complaint that Quebeckers are using "arret," a word that "does not exist" to mean "stop," a French word that "does exist." Response that "arret" does exist; just "look it up.") >The problem is that ARRET (while it is indeed a valid word) is a NOUN. >In French (unlike English), one does not usually use a NOUN as a VERB >(imperative form). STOP is indeed the imperative form of a verb >(stopper), and so it makes sense to order someone to stop. Well, "stop" is a pretty unusual French imperative, even if there is a verb "stopper." But for an English-speaker to criticize the French for inventing or borrowing words like "arret" or "stop" is an interesting colour of paint to spray. >The comparison with English (Canadian vs American) is flawed, since in >English it is quite common for people to use nouns as verbs and vice >versa. Also, there is no definitive standard for English, while there >is one for the French language. That the Academie Francaise wants to freeze the French language does not mean that actual French people can't make up new words and usages. And it certainly does not restrict Quebeckers from doing the same. And if we really want to make fun of each others' linguistic practices, I recommend the creation of a new newsgroup: rec.languages.vituperation. highschool. -- Jim Clarke -- Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Toronto, Canada M5S 1A4 (416) 978-4058 clarke@csri.toronto.edu or clarke@csri.utoronto.ca or ...!{uunet, pyramid, watmath, ubc-cs}!utai!utcsri!clarke