Date:  Sat, 20 Jan 1996 17:04:15 -0800

From:  Dan Moonhawk Alford <dalford[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]S1.CSUHAYWARD.EDU>

Subject: Re: X come Y



On Fri, 19 Jan 1996, Bethany K. Dumas wrote:



> Twice recently on email lists, I have seen the construction "X come Y"

> where I would have expected "X cum Y." The most recent example comes from

> Anglican: "the simple Galilean handyman come preacher." When I queried

> the first author about his use of "come" instead of "cum" he said that he

> thought that "cum" triggered sexual connotations (ejaculate) that the

> spelling "come" did not and that he used the spelling "come" for that

> reason. (I think the author was a Canadian--I'll check my files to be

> sure.)

>

> The second author (of the above example) is an Anglican priest in

> Australia. I have queried him, but have not had a response yet.

>

> I have 2 questions:

>

> 1. Is this apparent Anglicization usual and customary? I don't recall

> seeing it beore seeing these two examples.

>

> 2. Is the Anglicization widespread through the English-speaking world?



or 3. Is it possible that the spelling 'come' is a tortured attempt to

come to grips with a medium which by its nature does not allow us to spell

'cum' in ITALICS?!! I guess people could still do _cum_.