Re: USAGE : English past tense and participle in -et

Quoting "Mark J. Reed" <markjreed@...>:

> On Sun, Dec 28, 2003 at 12:15:03AM +0100, Andreas Johansson wrote:
> > Quoting David Barrow <davidab@...>:
> >
> > > alot for a lot is a spelling matter
> >
> > Indeed, but a useful one; adopting the former for the quantifier allows us
> to
> > restrict the later for indef article plus the noun "lot".
>
> Argh.  The quantifier IS the indef article plus the noun "lot".
> I don't understand why you feel the need to make a distinction where
> none exists.
Because that's the way I learnt English.

But let's forget me. _If_ there's no difference, _why_ do we see the one-words
spelling "alot" commonly used, but _not_ **"abunch" or similar, and this by
native speakers?

                                                    Andreas

Reply