🚀 go-pugleaf

Loren Petrich wrote:
...

> 
>         One example is natural languages, which reveal an abundance of
> evidence of path dependency. Consider English's awkward spelling. Even
> aside from there, check out:
[long list of spelling deleted]

I don't know a lot about linux, but I do know a fair amount of
linguistics; my MA is in psycholinguistics.

Irregular spelling in English has nothing to do with path dependancy and
everything to do with shifts in pronounciation that spelling does not
track. Every english spelling was once regular, either in English or in
the root borrowed from another language. Pronounciations drift over
time, various dialects diverge, and yet the common spelling allows
speakers of these dialects to communicate via the written word with no
difficulty. 

If a native of rural Missisippi and a native of Newcastle were to meet,
the phonological differences alone would conspire to make their speech
mutually indecipherable. Yet if they were to write out their words
there'd be no problem at all, other than a few differences in
nomenclature.

Similarly if English were written in a purely phonological manner we'd
find writings from the 14th century completely opaque, and yet the
common spelling makes them readable with not too much difficulty.

'Path dependancy' just doesn't exist. Period.

--mike