Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.bugs.dist > #820832
| From | Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.bugs.dist |
| Subject | Bug#861025: "sangs" should not be in the English dictionary |
| Date | 2017-04-26 12:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tAs3v-Rc-19@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <tzwiR-4TQ-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <tzUlc-4gQ-29@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 03:05:31PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> Control: retitle -1 sangs should be no lower than -80, probably -95, not -35
> Control: tag -1 pending
>
> On Sun, 23 Apr 2017, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > The English dictionary includes the word "sangs". I can't find any
> > evidence suggesting that this is a word in English, based on several
> > different dictionaries. ("sang" is a word, but not one with a plural
> > like that.)
>
> Apparently, sang is the common name for /Panax quinquefolius/, and its
> plural is sangs.
Interesting. I can find a little bit of evidence of that on Wikipedia,
but none in any dictionary I could source.
> However, that's so obscure that it while it's reasonable to be in
> -insane or possibly -huge, it definitely should not be in -35 where it
> is currently.
Seems fair. Thanks!
Back to linux.debian.bugs.dist | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Bug#861025: "sangs" should not be in the English dictionary Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> - 2017-04-23 22:30 +0200
Bug#861025: "sangs" should not be in the English dictionary Don Armstrong <don@debian.org> - 2017-04-25 00:10 +0200
Bug#861025: "sangs" should not be in the English dictionary Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> - 2017-04-26 12:10 +0200
csiph-web