[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: What is a lightweight language

   From: "Christopher Barber" <cbarber@curl.com>
   To: <ds26@gte.com>, <ll1-discuss@ai.mit.edu>
   Subject: Re: What is a lightweight language
   Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 12:28:58 -0500
   | In my lexicographic moments, I have often thought that
   | the word _lave_ (= that which is left over) would have 
   | been ideal for what we currently call continuation.  
   | It is monosyllabic and distinctively so. 
   I thought that "lave" meant to "to wash" (thus lavatory).
It does.  The two meanings seem to be etymologically unrelated.   
The washing meaning is related to "lavish" and "lavage" as well
as "lavatory", whereas the "leftover" meaning is related to
"leave" and to words in Old High German.  (So saith Merriam-
Webster's Tenth Collegiate.)

I am reminded of the Nellie Forbush number from "South Pacific":
"I'm Gonna Wash That Man Right Outa My Hair."  I suppose
that in the end, the man would be "lave" in both senses!