🚀 go-pugleaf

Tim May <timcmay@removethis.got.net> writes:

>In article <e10i3m$2j0@u1.netgate.net>, Geoff Miller
><geoffm@u1.netgate.net> wrote:

>> Meg Worley <meg@steam.Stanford.EDU> writes:
>> 
>> > [1] Pace, Geoffski.  Language has changed a bit since the
>> > corset days when you learned English.


>> Excuse me?  You've seen my picture; I doubt I'm much, if at all, 
>> older than you are.  Besides, I don't take issue with the way
>> you used "troll," i.e., as a verb.  My objection regarding that
>> word is people using it as a noun.  A person who trolls isn't a
>> "troll"; he's a *troller.*

>Back formations, even accidental intersections with established words,
>are what makes a language rich(er). Akin to punning.

>Trolling as a noun, derived from trawling, trolling, as in fishing,
>back-forms a connection to the Old Norse/folk legend image of a troll. 

I like it too, now, although I was big on that objection for some
time myself.  

Also *technically* the proper use of "trolling" is that you
troll a bait, and troll *for* fish.  So properly you would 
say "I'm trolling for n00bs" or "I'm trolling this obvious
mispeling to get pedants" but not "you have been trolled",
which is a good case for not insisting on proper usage.



-- 
"Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of sXXXch,    Joe
.. or the right of the people peaceably to XXXemble, and to        Bay
peXXXion the government for a redress of grievances."          Stanford
-- from the First Amendment to the US ConsXXXution           University