From Newsgroup: comp.editors

Marion <marion@facts.com> writes:

it's kind of like when I ask people to use "lend" as a verb vs "loan"
as a noun; or when I notice people using "further" for "farther" in
terms of distances; or when people use "less" instead of "fewer" for
things that can be counted; or when people use "dirt" when they really
mean "soil"; or when they call a "stone" a "rock" when all of these
things are actually not what people think.

- rCLLendrCY is indeed not currently in use as a noun, outside of Scottish
and northern English dialects, where it has been in use as a noun
(meaning rCLloanrCY) since at least 01575, with attestations up to the
present day.
<https://archive.org/details/oed6aarch/page/n208/mode/1up>

- rCLLoanrCY has been in use as a verb (as well as a noun) meaning rCLto lendrCY
since at least 01200, with attestations pretty continuously for 800
years up to the present day.
<https://archive.org/details/oed6aarch/page/n385/mode/1up>

- rCLFurtherrCY has been in use with the meaning rCLfartherrCY in terms of
distances since at least 01578, with attestations up to the present
day except for the 18th century.
<https://archive.org/details/oed04arch/page/n631/mode/1up>

- rCLLessrCY has been in use with the meaning rCLa smaller number of; fewerrCY
since at least King |alfred in 0888, making this 1138-year-old meaning
the longest-standing one you ask people to refrain from using.
<https://archive.org/details/oed6aarch/page/n221/mode/1up> (A.I.1.c,
bottom of the left column)

Additionally, rCLlessrCY has the meaning rCLOf not so great size, extent,
or degreerCY, a meaning which is not shared by rCLfewerrCY, and is
eminently applicable to things that can be counted. For example,
driving to work at 90 kilometers per hour uses *less* resources than
driving to work at 120 kilometers per hour, because your fuel
consumption is lower, but it doesnrCOt use *fewer* resources; it uses
*the same number* of resources (gasoline, the car, the brake pads,
etc.), just to a smaller extent.

- rCLSoilrCY and rCLdirtrCY are both fairly polysemous. Maybe you can explain
which usage you are taking issue with? For reference, the meanings of
rCLdirtrCY given in
<https://archive.org/details/oed03arch/page/n409/mode/1up> are
excrement; filth; worthless things; land; people you donrCOt like;
mud/soil; gangue; washdirt; dirtiness; meanness; bad weather; poison
gas in a mine; and to make dirty. The meanings of rCLsoilrCY given in
<https://archive.org/details/oed9aarch/oed9aarch/page/n384/mode/1up>
are the ground; plains; site; estate; land/region; place of onerCOs
nativity; domicile; materials of the ground such as sand and clay;
mould/earth; sill; and lintel.

Similar remarks surely apply to the historical meanings of rCLstonerCY and rCLrockrCY, but it is getting to be my bedtime, and I think this adequately makes the point that, in general, you seem to be taking up arms against
the Oxford English Dictionary and centuries of established English
usage. Perhaps you have access to an arbiter of English meanings more authoritative than the OED and the English-language literary corpus?
What might that be?

Kragen
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2