The most common pronunciation of "would" in "I would like to"

Well, for the first 3, I believe
that in Spanish, thay just add an s to render a plural.
I 'm too ignorant to comment on Russian (e.g. "Bolshevik").
I don 't know from which language "apricot" derives.

Well, for the first 3, I believe
that in Spanish, thay just add an s to render a plural.
I 'm too ignorant to comment on Russian (e.g. "Bolshevik").
I don 't know from which language "apricot" derives.

What your own words shows is that it doesn't matter what language a word comes from,
when it enters a new language, it follows the rules of the new language.

Japanese, like pretty much every language, has many borrowed English words.

You wouldn't recognize any of them.

They aren't written in English, they aren't pronounced as they are in English
and many times they don't have a meaning that is identical to the English one.

That's completely natural of course because Japanese is Japanese.

I BELIEVE u ! (about that) (except as applied to MacArthur)

Well, I recognize the right of the Japs
to do whatever thay want with their own language.

Nope, there's more than enough to keep you busy for a good long time.

Remember though, that there was and is no need to procrastinate when "logic" is on your side.

Anyway, I remember promising (on this thread, or on another one)
to address some of your concerns, but having failed to do so.
Accordingly, I felt guilty. I 'd track it down, if u wanted me to,
so as to keep my word & to honor that committment.

I BELIEVE u ! (about that) (except as applied to MacArthur)

Nope, not even that one.
What's this one, garu or this sutoraiku?

Well, I recognize the right of the Japs
to do whatever thay want with their own language.

What you don't recognize, in your ignorance, is that that's the way it is with every language.

You've proven yourself wrong.

If it was a "rule" of English [any language actually] that we use the rules of the mother language
for borrowed words, then it would apply equally to the words borrowed from all languages.

You know it doesn't and still you continue with the charade.

Anyway, I remember promising (on this thread, or on another one)
to address some of your concerns, but having failed to do so.
Accordingly, I felt guilty. I 'd track it down, if u wanted me to,
so as to keep my word & to honor that committment.

You don't have to track very far, Dave. It's in this very thread.

I note that you have also failed to address the issue of words borrowed from other languages.

Was that because of a dentist appointment?

I shall re-iterate:
when we speak words of other languages
(e.g.: forum, from Latin) we shoud apply the usage rules
of their language of origin, because we r USING that language when we speak or write those words.

I shall re-iterate:
when we speak words of other languages
(e.g.: forum, from Latin) we shoud apply the usage rules
of their language of origin, because we r USING that language when we speak or write those words.

As I've mentioned at least once, Om, repeating nonsense doesn't make it any less nonsensical.

The first time you advanced this spurious notion, you could be forgiven for your ignorance.
But now you are advancing a lie for I've shown you that this silly notion isn't followed with any regularity at all.

It's completely ludicrous, as you yourself have noted - you admit that you don't know the rules for plural marking
or the pronunciation for all the languages of the world.

That is TRUE
(that I know not plural marking for almost all alien languages),
but I fail to understand the reason that u consider that to be significant or relevant to this discussion.

Will u elucidate ?

when we speak words of other languages
(e.g.: forum, from Latin) we shoud apply the usage rules
of their language of origin, because we r USING that language when we speak or write those words.

That is TRUE
(that I know not plural marking for almost all alien languages),
but I fail to understand the reason that u consider that to be significant or relevant to this discussion.

Will u elucidate ?

I'll let you do it, Om.

David, first you admit that you don't know the rules for marking plurals for "almost all alien languages".

But you suggest that "when we speak words of other languages
we shoud apply the usage rules of their language of origin,
because we r USING that language when we speak or write those words".

You can't see the inconsistencies in your ideas?
You can't see how impossible the situation you've advanced is?

Correct me if I 'm rong,
but I seem to detect a tacit implication
from u that I DO use languages that I don't know.

Correct me if I 'm rong,
but I seem to detect a tacit implication
from u that I DO use languages that I don't know.

There's no need to make a pretense of being thick.

You use words that have come from other languages where you follow the rules of English;
two examples that I've already provided, 'apricot' and 'Bolshevik'.

Two is more than enough to illustrate that your idea is nonsense.
I suspect that you have had occasion to mark both of these words
in their plural sense and to do so you used the rules of English.

It did not occur to me that apricot was an alien word.
I never considered the possibility. I have usually referred to
the communists or the commies, rather than "Bolshivik"
but, in candor, I cannot deny that I have sometimes said
"Bolshevik"; not ofen. I just did not think of it.
I never made a conscious decision to Americanize that word.

Major Periods of Borrowing

...

Those who first use the new word might use it at first only with speakers of the source language who know the word, but at some point they come to use the word with those to whom the word was not previously known. To these speakers the word may sound 'foreign'. At this stage, when most speakers do not know the word and if they hear it think it is from another language, the word can be called a foreign word. There are many foreign words and phrases used in English such as bon vivant (French), mutatis mutandis (Latin), and Fahrvergnuegen (German).

However, in time more speakers can become familiar with a new foreign word or expression. The community of users of this word can grow to the point where even people who know little or nothing of the source language understand, and even use, the novel word themselves. The new word becomes conventionalized: part of the conventional ways of speaking in the borrowing language. At this point we call it a borrowing or loanword.

(It should be noted that not all foreign words do become loanwords; if they fall out of use before they become widespread, they do not reach the loanword stage.)

Conventionalization is a gradual process in which a word progressively permeates a larger and larger speech community, becoming part of ever more people's linguistic repetoire. As part of its becoming more familiar to more people, a newly borrowed word gradually adopts sound and other characteristics of the borrowing language as speakers who do not know the source language accommodate it to their own linguistic systems. In time, people in the borrowing community do not perceive the word as a loanword at all. Generally, the longer a borrowed word has been in the language, and the more frequently it is used, the more it resembles the native words of the language.

http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kemmer/Words04/structure/borrowed.html

I never made a conscious decision to Americanize that word

It did not occur to me that apricot was an alien word.
I never considered the possibility. I have usually referred to
the communists or the commies, rather than "Bolshivik"
but, in candor, I cannot deny that I have sometimes said
"Bolshevik"; not ofen. I just did not think of it.
I never made a conscious decision to Americanize that word.

Yet you ignore the salient point. There are thousands upon thousands of other words
that have come to English and for them you follow the rules of English for marking plurals.

See the same article, link below, for many Latin words that bear little resemblance to some very common words we use today. That they have changed as much as they have point to what I've said from the outset. Words are "borrowed" but they are massaged to fit the phonology, the grammar rules of the borrowing language and often changed meanings or changes in nuance.

If it was possible to return these words to a group of REAL modern day Latin speakers,
the words would be foreign to them in all respects.

Major Periods of Borrowing

...

Those who first use the new word might use it at first only with speakers of the source language who know the word, but at some point they come to use the word with those to whom the word was not previously known. To these speakers the word may sound 'foreign'. At this stage, when most speakers do not know the word and if they hear it think it is from another language, the word can be called a foreign word. There are many foreign words and phrases used in English such as bon vivant (French), mutatis mutandis (Latin), and Fahrvergnuegen (German).

However, in time more speakers can become familiar with a new foreign word or expression. The community of users of this word can grow to the point where even people who know little or nothing of the source language understand, and even use, the novel word themselves. The new word becomes conventionalized: part of the conventional ways of speaking in the borrowing language. At this point we call it a borrowing or loanword.

(It should be noted that not all foreign words do become loanwords; if they fall out of use before they become widespread, they do not reach the loanword stage.)

Conventionalization is a gradual process in which a word progressively permeates a larger and larger speech community, becoming part of ever more people's linguistic repetoire. As part of its becoming more familiar to more people, a newly borrowed word gradually adopts sound and other characteristics of the borrowing language as speakers who do not know the source language accommodate it to their own linguistic systems. In time, people in the borrowing community do not perceive the word as a loanword at all. Generally, the longer a borrowed word has been in the language, and the more frequently it is used, the more it resembles the native words of the language.

http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kemmer/Words04/structure/borrowed.html

I never made a conscious decision to Americanize that word

You don't "Americanize" any of these words.

The rules for marking plurals, in fact the vast majority of grammar rules
were devised long before there ever was [u mean were?? David] any Americans or any American dialect.