Re: THEORY: irregular conlangs

Nik Taylor <fortytwo@...> wrote:
>
> For instance, if people
> begin to use "people" instead of "persons", it doesn't involve some
> editing of a dictionary entry in their brain, but merely changing the
> connections, so that instead of "person" being connected to "persons",
> it's connected to "people" instead.
    This is, BTW, the exact opposite of what's happened to my dialect in =
my
lifetime.  When I was young the word "persons" was only used in the set
phrase "person or persons unknown".  Otherwise the plural of "person" was
regularly "people".  Over the years (starting in the '70's, maybe) =
"persons"
has become an alternate plural.  Not that I use it; it still sounds odd =
to
me.

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D

             Dennis Paul Himes    <>    dennis@himes.connix.com
             homepage: http://www.connix.com/~dennis/dennis.htm
        Gladilatian page: http://www.connix.com/~dennis/glad/lang.htm
=20
Disclaimer: "True, I talk of dreams; which are the children of an idle
brain, begot of nothing but vain fantasy; which is as thin of substance =
as
the air."                      - Romeo & Juliet, Act I Scene iv Verse =
96-99