Right, those are definitions, but they are definitions for a reason. If you have unique definitions for common terms feel free to express them, but you can't simply use a term with your personalized definition and expect the world to know what you mean. Please, educate us.
I don't wish to venture into territory that is far too political if I were to give you my definition of what liberals truly are, as it would probably be deleted.
1) Do you have a link because it's spelled leapt in every dictionary I checked.
2) Language is about communication. I doubt [@]SpamSandwich[/@] has any problem with AI using any term no matter if it's new or archaic, but for the sake of communication shouldn't they noat when they use something atypical?
Here's my favorite comment in the discussion on the page I will send in a minute:
'But I digress. Leaped, leapt and lept all have their valid place in our language. I focus on leapt and lept because leaped and leapt both conjure up images of athleticism or spryness. Both make one think of coordinated movement. Lept, I think, conveys desperate survival as the motive.
"The boulder crashed through the wall as he leaped to safety" just doesn't carry the same feel as "He lept to safety".
Is lept just a misspelling of leapt? I don't think so. And, by the way, if "lept" was last used in the 16th century, I've been reading some well-hidden treasures.'
Here's the page. The best comment is at the very end.
I believe "lept" should be revived, because it's less problematic for people who are learning English as a second language. The verb should follow the simpler "lead/led" model of past and past participle formation.
I don't wish to venture into territory that is far too political if I were to give you my definition of what liberals truly are, as it would probably be deleted.
Bullshit! You already did that, what I'm requesting is for you to back away from politics to define terms you've already stated.
What's wrong with libertarians? It sure beats being a liberal.
Wasn't saying anything was wrong about Libertarians, just that authoritarian language positions are a contradiction worth pointing out, if they're held by one.
Here's my favorite comment in the discussion on the page I will send in a minute:
'But I digress. Leaped, leapt and lept all have their valid place in our language. I focus on leapt and lept because leaped and leapt both conjure up images of athleticism or spryness. Both make one think of coordinated movement. Lept, I think, conveys desperate survival as the motive.
1) If I say leapt |lept| or lept |lept| outloud they sound exactly the same so how does one convey anything different than the other?
2) There is some truth to how we conjure uo images, as noted by the Bouba-Kiki Effect, but that typically occurs with the pronunciation as based on a spelling. I conjure no different feeling from leapt or lept, except knowing that if I wrote lept a word processor would suggest leapt and a professor would make it wrong.
"The boulder crashed through the wall as he leaped to safety" just doesn't carry the same feel as "He lept to safety".
Why not leapt to safety?
Is lept just a misspelling of leapt? I don't think so.
That all depends on whether it was intentional or not.
And, by the way, if "lept" was last used in the 16th century, I've been reading some well-hidden treasures.'
1) Sources?
2) Look, there is nothing wrong with one choosing to spell, pronounce or even redefine words differently. All human language is invented so feel free to reinvent it as you see fit — which includes reintroducing 16th century spellings. You don't even need a reason like it making more sense or helps with communication. You can simply like the way it sounds or what it conjures for you, but you need to be clear as to why you're introducing something archaic, obscure, or simply invented or you risk hindering communication, not helping it.
Wasn't saying anything was wrong about Libertarians, just that authoritarian language positions are a contradiction worth pointing out, if they're held by one.
I'm definitely an authoritarian when it comes to language, in the sense that I strongly favor English only in the US, and I believe that other languages should be banned from official use, but that's a whole other discussion I suppose.
Are you offended by modern English? I didn't create it, I just use it.
I'm more interested in preserving older forms that are worth preserving. "Lept" is a good one. "Led" is another, now endangered. "Lose" might be losing ground. "Too" is off to the dustbin too, unless a preservationist effort kicks in. Anybody can join in such a project by speaking out like you just did. Apologies for the Libertarian distraction.
Now what was the topic? Oh yeah, Australia's retail took a leap. Lemme think of something to say. Sorry, "Let me . . ."
liberal - open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values.
libertarian - a person who believes in the doctrine of free will.
free will - the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one's own discretion.
conservative - holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation
Liberal: The common man doesn't think long term. Without government programs to take care of his health and retirement he will not save, and have no money for the hospital and no money in his old age. He also holds ignorant opinions from the past (such as racism and sexism) that need to be cured through government programs and art/movies showing white people holding hands with black people, etc.
Conservative: The common man is perfectly capable of taking care of himself, he doesn't need government programs, all he needs is a strong moral code. One that encourages him to work hard, save, and be self-disciplined, and he will be fine.
Libertarian: I don't want your big government Mr Lefty and I don't want your moral code Mr Righty, I am fine as I am. Don't tread on me!
I am a non-religious conservative. I think people can take care of themselves but only with a moral code. However you don't have to follow a religious one. This is the information age. You can easily find biographies of successful people and read what principles they followed.
Mr. Libertarian wants to outlaw the earlier, clearer spelling, the one that parallels other past-tense formations like "slept"? Ok, fine, continue the confusion that's led to people misspelling the past tense of "lead," as in -a horse to water, as lead, pronounced like the metal.
That's an authoritarian, narrowly focused site you linked to. Look up "lept" in the Merriam-Webster Second International. Surely you have one handy.
1) Do you have a link because it's spelled leapt in every dictionary I checked.
2) Language is about communication. I doubt @SpamSandwich has any problem with AI using any term no matter if it's new or archaic, but for the sake of communication shouldn't they noat when they use something atypical?
I think 'lept' is used in the King James Bible. It’s correct, but tends to be replaced by the more modern 'leapt' now.
Are you offended by modern English? I didn't create it, I just use it.
I'm more interested in preserving older forms that are worth preserving. "Lept" is a good one. "Led" is another, now endangered. "Lose" might be losing ground. "Too" is off to the dustbin too, unless a preservationist effort kicks in. Anybody can join in such a project by speaking out like you just did. Apologies for the Libertarian distraction.
Now what was the topic? Oh yeah, Australia's retail took a leap. Lemme think of something to say. Sorry, "Let me . . ."
I agree with you that older forms are worth preserving, but I'm not sure that they're that endangered to begin with.
I am traveling in NYC...I am astounded by the number of 6s & 6+s on the street in the nahds of consumers and all Apple Stores are hopping. No big surprise ro me.
I was at the SoHo store today, and people are still lining up for the iPhone.
I think 'lept' is used in the King James Bible. It’s correct, but tends to be replaced by the more modern 'leapt' now.
1) In terms of proper usage it needs to be in a common dictionary.
2a) I checked all bibles and couldn't find it.
2b) The King James Bible was written in the early 17th century. Not exactly promising for saying that the spelling is considered correct in the 21st century.
1) In terms of proper usage it needs to be in a common dictionary.
2a) I checked all bibles and couldn't find it.
2b) The King James Bible was written in the early 17th century. Not exactly promising for saying that the spelling is considered correct in the 21st century.
Everything I've found said that the spelling of 'lept' hasn't been used since the 16th century. Personally I don't consider it wrong.
Everything I've found said that the spelling of 'lept' hasn't been used since the 16th century. Personally I don't consider it wrong.
I don't consider any aspect of language in the broader sense, but if you are writing any scholarly would you think that's the correct usage for the 21st century? Of course not. Writing in Middle English for your paper on thermal dynamics wouldn't make sense, would it, but Middle English isn't wrong.
Hopefully the success of the iPhone 6 here in Australia will make it a key priority for the rollout of ApplePay. I think it would make sense to roll it out in a country that already has NFC terminals in most retailers, has a large number of iPhone 6 users and has less banks/card issuers/retailers to work with than a larger market would.
iTunes radio launched here only a few months after the US so hopefully we will se a repeat of that with ApplePay. I usually only carry my iPhone, bank card and a couple of other cards with me so having ApplePay will bring me one step closer to only needing to grab my iPhone as I walk out the door. If car manufacturers are able to tap into the NFC capabilities for unlocking/starting a vehicle then hopefully soon I won't even need to worry about the keys.
Comments
Right, those are definitions, but they are definitions for a reason. If you have unique definitions for common terms feel free to express them, but you can't simply use a term with your personalized definition and expect the world to know what you mean. Please, educate us.
I don't wish to venture into territory that is far too political if I were to give you my definition of what liberals truly are, as it would probably be deleted.
Here's my favorite comment in the discussion on the page I will send in a minute:
'But I digress. Leaped, leapt and lept all have their valid place in our language. I focus on leapt and lept because leaped and leapt both conjure up images of athleticism or spryness. Both make one think of coordinated movement. Lept, I think, conveys desperate survival as the motive.
"The boulder crashed through the wall as he leaped to safety" just doesn't carry the same feel as "He lept to safety".
Is lept just a misspelling of leapt? I don't think so. And, by the way, if "lept" was last used in the 16th century, I've been reading some well-hidden treasures.'
Here's the page. The best comment is at the very end.
http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/76167/lept-vs-leapt-vs-leaped
I believe "lept" should be revived, because it's less problematic for people who are learning English as a second language. The verb should follow the simpler "lead/led" model of past and past participle formation.
Bullshit! You already did that, what I'm requesting is for you to back away from politics to define terms you've already stated.
Bullshit! You already did that, what I'm requesting is for you to back away from politics to define terms you've already stated.
There is no way to define it without getting overly political.
I've had enough posts on this section of the forum get deleted before, so I'm not going to fall into that trap anymore.
Wasn't saying anything was wrong about Libertarians, just that authoritarian language positions are a contradiction worth pointing out, if they're held by one.
1) If I say leapt |lept| or lept |lept| outloud they sound exactly the same so how does one convey anything different than the other?
2) There is some truth to how we conjure uo images, as noted by the Bouba-Kiki Effect, but that typically occurs with the pronunciation as based on a spelling. I conjure no different feeling from leapt or lept, except knowing that if I wrote lept a word processor would suggest leapt and a professor would make it wrong.
Why not leapt to safety?
That all depends on whether it was intentional or not.
1) Sources?
2) Look, there is nothing wrong with one choosing to spell, pronounce or even redefine words differently. All human language is invented so feel free to reinvent it as you see fit — which includes reintroducing 16th century spellings. You don't even need a reason like it making more sense or helps with communication. You can simply like the way it sounds or what it conjures for you, but you need to be clear as to why you're introducing something archaic, obscure, or simply invented or you risk hindering communication, not helping it.
Wasn't saying anything was wrong about Libertarians, just that authoritarian language positions are a contradiction worth pointing out, if they're held by one.
I'm definitely an authoritarian when it comes to language, in the sense that I strongly favor English only in the US, and I believe that other languages should be banned from official use, but that's a whole other discussion I suppose.
Bullshit! I much prefer when you own your bigotry, at least that is honest.
I'm more interested in preserving older forms that are worth preserving. "Lept" is a good one. "Led" is another, now endangered. "Lose" might be losing ground. "Too" is off to the dustbin too, unless a preservationist effort kicks in. Anybody can join in such a project by speaking out like you just did. Apologies for the Libertarian distraction.
Now what was the topic? Oh yeah, Australia's retail took a leap. Lemme think of something to say. Sorry, "Let me . . ."
Liberal: The common man doesn't think long term. Without government programs to take care of his health and retirement he will not save, and have no money for the hospital and no money in his old age. He also holds ignorant opinions from the past (such as racism and sexism) that need to be cured through government programs and art/movies showing white people holding hands with black people, etc.
Conservative: The common man is perfectly capable of taking care of himself, he doesn't need government programs, all he needs is a strong moral code. One that encourages him to work hard, save, and be self-disciplined, and he will be fine.
Libertarian: I don't want your big government Mr Lefty and I don't want your moral code Mr Righty, I am fine as I am. Don't tread on me!
I am a non-religious conservative. I think people can take care of themselves but only with a moral code. However you don't have to follow a religious one. This is the information age. You can easily find biographies of successful people and read what principles they followed.
Mr. Libertarian wants to outlaw the earlier, clearer spelling, the one that parallels other past-tense formations like "slept"? Ok, fine, continue the confusion that's led to people misspelling the past tense of "lead," as in -a horse to water, as lead, pronounced like the metal.
That's an authoritarian, narrowly focused site you linked to. Look up "lept" in the Merriam-Webster Second International. Surely you have one handy.
1) Do you have a link because it's spelled leapt in every dictionary I checked.
2) Language is about communication. I doubt @SpamSandwich has any problem with AI using any term no matter if it's new or archaic, but for the sake of communication shouldn't they noat when they use something atypical?
I think 'lept' is used in the King James Bible. It’s correct, but tends to be replaced by the more modern 'leapt' now.
There is no way to define it without getting overly political.
I've had enough posts on this section of the forum get deleted before, so I'm not going to fall into that trap anymore.
Bullshit! I much prefer when you own your bigotry, at least that is honest.
Anyone who accuses another of bigotry has already lost the argument.
Are you offended by modern English? I didn't create it, I just use it.
I'm more interested in preserving older forms that are worth preserving. "Lept" is a good one. "Led" is another, now endangered. "Lose" might be losing ground. "Too" is off to the dustbin too, unless a preservationist effort kicks in. Anybody can join in such a project by speaking out like you just did. Apologies for the Libertarian distraction.
Now what was the topic? Oh yeah, Australia's retail took a leap. Lemme think of something to say. Sorry, "Let me . . ."
I agree with you that older forms are worth preserving, but I'm not sure that they're that endangered to begin with.
I was at the SoHo store today, and people are still lining up for the iPhone.
No.
Plus they're great help in finding books.
1) In terms of proper usage it needs to be in a common dictionary.
2a) I checked all bibles and couldn't find it.
2b) The King James Bible was written in the early 17th century. Not exactly promising for saying that the spelling is considered correct in the 21st century.
Everything I've found said that the spelling of 'lept' hasn't been used since the 16th century. Personally I don't consider it wrong.
I don't consider any aspect of language in the broader sense, but if you are writing any scholarly would you think that's the correct usage for the 21st century? Of course not. Writing in Middle English for your paper on thermal dynamics wouldn't make sense, would it, but Middle English isn't wrong.
iTunes radio launched here only a few months after the US so hopefully we will se a repeat of that with ApplePay. I usually only carry my iPhone, bank card and a couple of other cards with me so having ApplePay will bring me one step closer to only needing to grab my iPhone as I walk out the door. If car manufacturers are able to tap into the NFC capabilities for unlocking/starting a vehicle then hopefully soon I won't even need to worry about the keys.