Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: "Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle_uk@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk>
Newsgroups: alt.languages.english
Subject: Re: used to
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 21:56:33 +0100
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <3jg4ovFpsiliU1@individual.net>
References: <1120427607.208666.126580@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <slrndcitiq.rrd.chris@ccserver.keris.net> <pskjc1hpl89ib7cn6mq3p6rf60lrj372lt@4ax.com> <slrndclb7q.gu1.chris@ccserver.keris.net> <1120991765.440768.39790@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <slrndd27pr.pm8.chris@ccserver.keris.net> <1121041347.535908.253920@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
X-Trace: individual.net qHI0184zdhKvM1/nCzr3wwx96lGb0FXSxE52GTCekTYHzodvYm
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.languages.english:868
credoquaabsurdum wrote:
> Chris Croughton wrote:
>>> usen't (colloquial shortening of use not)
>>>
>>> c1863 T. TAYLOR in M. R. Booth Eng. Plays of 19th Cent. (1969)
II.
>>> 96, I usen't to mind unkind looks and words much once. 1907 G. B.
>>> SHAW Major Barbara III. 255 That is a new accomplishment of
>>> Andrew's, by the way. He usent to drink. 1929 'H. H. RICHARDSON'
>>> Ultima Thule III.
>>
>> Is the apostrophe missing in the original?
>
> Lemme check on that one, Chris...
>
> Both the apostrophe and the space are missing in the Shaw citation
on
> the OED page. Bingo.
>
> Now let's look around and find that particular comedy...voila!
>
> http://www.online-literature.com/view.php/major_barbara
>
> LADY BRITOMART. It was much more excusable to marry him than to
> get drunk with him. That is a new accomplishment of Andrew's, by
> the way. He usen't to drink.
>
> ...apostrophe firmly in place. I would bet, however, that this is
not
> a typo on behalf of OED staff, but that they scanned the original
> printing and that's how it first appeared. A Google search turned
up
> news of a critical edition of Major Barbara, but from what I
> understand, OED policy in that case is still to scan the first
edition
> (be it UK or US) into their database.
I don't think they "scan". For good or ill. Are you in a position to
correct me on this point?
--
Mike.
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
|