info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
for 1940's Americans to say (orally) "DV" -- as common as for Americans to say (orally) "i.e." today ?
7 views
Skip to first unread message
henh...@gmail.com
Dec 28, 2023, 6:37:16 AM12/28/23
to
The following (if pretty accurate) shows that Bard.Google.Com is an amazing resource.
_________________ for 1940's Americans to say (orally) "DV" -- as common as for Americans to say (orally) "i.e." today ?
Comparing the oral usage of "DV" in the 1940s to "i.e." today isn't quite apples-to-apples, as they have differing levels of historical and practical use. Here's a breakdown:
"DV" (Deo Volente):
-- 1940s: Uncommon. While "Deo Volente" existed in English, it was primarily a formal, written phrase. Most Americans wouldn't use Latin abbreviations in everyday speech.
-- Today: Extremely rare. Latin phrases like "DV" are even less prevalent in modern, informal conversation.
"i.e." (id est):
-- 1940s: Moderately common, especially in formal settings and among individuals with strong education in classical languages.
-- Today: Less common in oral speech, but still used occasionally in formal or academic contexts. However, simpler alternatives like "that is" or "in other words" are more prevalent in casual conversation.
Therefore, while both phrases have seen a decline in oral usage, "DV" was never truly a part of everyday spoken language, unlike "i.e." which still pops up from time to time, albeit less frequently.
In summary, comparing "DV" in the 1940s to "i.e." today paints a picture of two linguistic paths with distinct starting points and trajectories. One was a niche written phrase that never made it to the casual spoken realm, while the other, though experiencing a decline, still holds on in specific contexts.
_________________ for 1940's Americans to say (orally) "DV" -- as common as for Americans to say (orally) "i.e." today ?
Comparing the oral usage of "DV" in the 1940s to "i.e." today isn't quite apples-to-apples, as they have differing levels of historical and practical use. Here's a breakdown:
"DV" (Deo Volente):
-- 1940s: Uncommon. While "Deo Volente" existed in English, it was primarily a formal, written phrase. Most Americans wouldn't use Latin abbreviations in everyday speech.
-- Today: Extremely rare. Latin phrases like "DV" are even less prevalent in modern, informal conversation.
"i.e." (id est):
-- 1940s: Moderately common, especially in formal settings and among individuals with strong education in classical languages.
-- Today: Less common in oral speech, but still used occasionally in formal or academic contexts. However, simpler alternatives like "that is" or "in other words" are more prevalent in casual conversation.
Therefore, while both phrases have seen a decline in oral usage, "DV" was never truly a part of everyday spoken language, unlike "i.e." which still pops up from time to time, albeit less frequently.
In summary, comparing "DV" in the 1940s to "i.e." today paints a picture of two linguistic paths with distinct starting points and trajectories. One was a niche written phrase that never made it to the casual spoken realm, while the other, though experiencing a decline, still holds on in specific contexts.
0 new messages