End of ADS-L Digest - 16 May 1998 to 17 May 1998
<br>************************************************
<br>
<br>======================================================================
<br>
<br>From: Automatic digest processor (5/17/98)
<br>To: Recipients of ADS-L digests
<br>
<br>         ADS-L Digest - 15 May 1998 to 16 May 1998             98-05-17 00:00:14
<br>There are 7 messages totalling 266 lines in this issue.
<br>
<br>Topics of the day:
<br>
<br>  1. New Word?
<br>  2. "Is it raining out?"
<br>  3. Phrase catching
<br>  4. hearn
<br>  5. 2 CFPs
<br>  6. RE>Bobbysoxer; Chairman of the Board
<br>  7. nativisms
<br>
<br>----------------------------------------------------------------------
<br>
<br>Date:    Sat, 16 May 1998 00:30:03 -0500
<br>From:    "Donald M. Lance" <engdl[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]SHOWME.MISSOURI.EDU>
<br>Subject: New Word?
<br>
<br>Your message has been enqueued and undeliverable for 1 day
<br>
<br>A Canadian server was unable to complete delivery of a msg I sent but will
<br>try off and on for 3 more days.  I'm sure it will get through to the
<br>addressee on Monday when the office it's being sent to stokes the ole
<br>computer.  (I'm not asking what's going on; I understand that.  See next
<br>comment)
<br>
<br>This 'enqueued' (enqued in USian) is reminiscent of the 'undecode' that I
<br>posted earlier.  Is there a redundancy or a pleonasm at work here?  There
<br>are only two instances here, and we all know it takes three trees to make a
<br>row, but do we see a pattern emerging here?  Earlier I joshed about geek
<br>grammar, but some kind of linguistic principle rather than a "mistake" must
<br>account for these forms.
<br>
<br>DMLance
<br>