Posted by anyman on May 19, 2002 at 22:21
Re: The Laws Of Physics 'Can' Change (Dogrock)
you so right...
philosophy, faith, and science are an inseparable triad of complimentary companions
none really functions without the other
using *none* here in the sense i intend it, made me for the first time ever consider the etymology of the english word *none*
is it an etymological derivative of *not one,* which may have in turn at some point been contracted to no'ne and then with the tendency toward simplification in language (rather than toward complexity -- which also has bearing on the creation/evolution discussion :-) that the apostrophe was dropped (as i believe we will see in future with some of the more common contractions used in english todays -- eg don't ----> dont, can't ----> cant)
as with *its* and *it's* the context in every case makes it clear which use is intended...i have long argued that the apsostrophe should be dropped from the contracted form of *it is*...it would thus look identical to the possessive form of *its* but there would be no instance where the context would not make -its- use abundantly clear...at least -none- i am aware of
odd musings from one with my prescriptive linguistic tendencies...but then i do recognize linguistic tedencies toward simplification...language use changes over time...and we should be able to change if change is reasonably warranted and older usage has become frivolous or trivial...of course, those of the literarily inclined should be able to maintain older usage for poetic et al purposes
just thinking out loud...
i guess that now i won't be able to sleep until i work out the etymology of the word *none*...a linguist's curse, eh :-)
Post a Followup