Imported Upstream version 2015.08.24

[deb_pkgs/scowl.git] / 6 / r / enable / SIGWORD.DOC

diff --git a/6/r/enable/SIGWORD.DOC b/6/r/enable/SIGWORD.DOC
deleted file mode 100644 (file)
index 62fbe9d..0000000
--- a/6/r/enable/SIGWORD.DOC
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,40 +0,0 @@
-                           THE SIGNATURE WORDS\r
-                           ÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜ\r
-\r
-\r
-\r
-In addition to the words which must be there, WORD.LST contains a number of\r
-additional words, called "signature words". These words serve several\r
-purposes. Their inclusion distinguishes this list from competing lists. They\r
-give the ENABLE list a certain flavor. And most important, they illustrate\r
-an important principle, which is that the English language is too vital, too\r
-chaotic, too *full*, to be adequately summed up by a single book, even one\r
-of such pedigree and scholarship as MW10.\r
-\r
-The signature words are MW10 oughta-bes, words and inflections which one or\r
-both of the ENABLE particpants believe are worthy of recognition as bona\r
-fide English. In many cases, such as "terraform" and "schlockmeister", there\r
-are no other words which can adequately take their place. Some words, such\r
-as "renormalize", "epitheliums" and "pantyhose", are well-documented by\r
-other dictionaries. Some, such as "stabbings", "transportee" and\r
-"birthdate", seem to have escaped the attention of all the major American\r
-lexicographers.\r
-\r
-Unlike most of the rest of the ENABLE package, the signature word list and\r
-its value (if any) are completely subjective.  Mendel and I found it\r
-impossible to completely agree on a number of words, and it would be\r
-surprising if anyone else found themselves in full agreement with either of\r
-us.  Is "absquatulate" a useful word, or a work of the devil? Is it possible\r
-to take the putative existence of the plural "breaksaway" seriously?  Does\r
-anyone actually say "bildungsromane"?  Is "unputdownable" a valuable\r
-addition to the lexicon, or the ultimate triumph of lack of style over lack\r
-of substance?\r
-\r
-Whether you agree with all our choices or not, we think the list to be an\r
-interesting illustration of the truism that the English language is just too\r
-damn big to be adequately captured, even for a moment, in anything so static\r
-as a dictionary, a CD-ROM, or even a "Benchmark Lexicon".\r
-\r
-\r
-\r
----Alan Beale\r