Kudos to Wiktionary for including ‘auxlang’
貼文者: mkj1887, 2017年5月22日
訊息: 4
語言: English
mkj1887 (顯示個人資料) 2017年5月22日下午11:00:30
The word ‘auxlang’ occurs neither in Benson, nor in Wells, nor in Vikivortaro, nor in ReVo, nor in Sonja. Nor does it occur in Merriam-Webster. It does, however, occur in Wiktionary, so kudos to Wiktionary!
Vestitor (顯示個人資料) 2017年5月23日上午2:51:47
Probably because its not an actual word. "Auxiliary-language" is not in standard dictionaries. Even Auxiliary-verb which is a fully recognised term is only a subentry of 'auxiliary'.
How come you don't heed the responses in these threads? The consensus is that it's neither necessary nor practical to have an official entry for every new coinage or slang word or dialect word or localism. In fact the way Esperanto works is the example: small base vocabulary that renders more than the sum of its parts.
An Esperantist ought to know better.
How come you don't heed the responses in these threads? The consensus is that it's neither necessary nor practical to have an official entry for every new coinage or slang word or dialect word or localism. In fact the way Esperanto works is the example: small base vocabulary that renders more than the sum of its parts.
An Esperantist ought to know better.
mkj1887 (顯示個人資料) 2017年5月23日下午12:37:21
Vestitor:Probably because its not an actual word. "Auxiliary-language" is not in standard dictionaries. Even Auxiliary-verb which is a fully recognised term is only a subentry of 'auxiliary'.Nothing was ever accomplished by a reasonable man.
How come you don't heed the responses in these threads? The consensus is that it's neither necessary nor practical to have an official entry for every new coinage or slang word or dialect word or localism. In fact the way Esperanto works is the example: small base vocabulary that renders more than the sum of its parts.
An Esperantist ought to know better.
Estas vi Esperantisto.