Re: USAGE: -ic(al) Re: [CONLANG] Most developed conlang

On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 18:18:13 +0200, Benct Philip Jonsson
<conlang@...> wrote:

>Interestingly my dictionary points out that the adverb to
>_politic_ is _politicly_,
Either the lexicographers have made a mistake, or they, or you, have confused
spelling with pronunciation.

The adverb corresponding to the noun "politics" and the adjective "political" is
spelled "politically".  But, in pronunciation of the word "politically", the vowel of
the "-cal-" syllable is so underemphasized and shortened as to be nearly
absent, depending on the speaker's idiolect.

The adjective "politic", whose opposite is "impolitic", is closer related,
semantically, to the adjective "polite" than to the adjective "political".  "Politic"
means something like polite but in a practical sense; it emphasizes the fact
that to offend someone by being impolitic, would be unwise and detrimental to
the impolitic person, rather than merely uncouth and nyekulturny.

This adjective "politic" and its opposite "impolitic" do not have corresponding
adverb forms.  There is no reason they can't acquire them; but if your
lexicographers meant "politic --> politicly" rather than "political --> politically",
they were just making it up, not relying on examples of actual usage.

>so obviously the rule that
>adjectives in _-ic_ insert _-al-_ before _-ly-_ may be
>overridden in such a case, which begs the question why it
>should be continued at all!