Re: Natural language with the MOST irregular verbs?

Sebastian Hew wrote:
> 
> J. W. Love wrote:
> > Sebastian wrote:
> >
> > > By this definition, THINK is weak, since its preterite
> > > and past participle THOUGHT are formed with the
> > > dental suffix -t.
> >
> > But a weak THINK would generate THINKT.
> >
> > For "strong," see the ninth edition of MWCD, definition 16: "of,
> > relating to, or constituting a verb or verb conjugation that forms
> > the past tense by a CHANGE IN THE ROOT VOWEL and the past participle
> > usu. by the addition of no suffix or a suffix containing _n_ with or
> > without change of the root vowel" (emphasis added).
> 
> Yes... I admit that I was wrong in my interpretation of the MW
> definition, but I still submit that it is confusing to define the terms
> this way when the standard definition in Germanic philology (which is
> where the terms came from in the first place) differs.

So in Sebastian-world, etymology is a guide to meaning? Silly knave!
-- 
Peter T. Daniels                       [EMAIL PROTECTED]