Re: THEORY: irregular conlangs
From: | Eric Christopherson <raccoon@...> |
Date: | Tuesday, October 5, 1999, 22:05 |
----- Original Message -----
From: Nik Taylor <fortytwo@...>
To: Multiple recipients of list CONLANG <CONLANG@...>
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 1999 7:14 PM
Subject: Re: irregular conlangs
> Don Blaheta wrote:
> > but as words pass from "relatively common" to "only sort of
> > common", they tend to re-analyse into regular words, anyway.
>
> Like "wrought", originally the past tense of "work", but now a seperate
> verb. Presumably, when the regular "worked" was used, some speakers
> retained "wrought", but since they were few, people thought it was a
> different verb.
I thought wrought was the past tense of wreak...