Subject: Re: about VAXstation performance
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
Date: 07/29/2000 00:49:01
>> As for what "MIP" is, it's the singular of "MIPS". [...]
> Double blunder... MIPS isn't a plural word, it's short for "million
> instructions per second", which makes "MIP" just silly. "million
> instructions per" what?
As I explained when thorpej made the same point in a different way,
that doesn't matter when back-forming.
> Backforming just don't work that way...
My dear friend, that is *exactly* how back-formation works: by
"incorrectly" assuming that a word that appears as though it might have
been formed by a regular process from some root was in fact so formed,
and inferring the root therefrom.
As online webster puts it:
1: a word formed by subtraction of a real or supposed affix from an
already existing longer word (as burgle from burglar)
2: the formation of a back-formation
I could argue about the "longer" part, but for the purposes of
discussing the "MIPS -> MIP" issue, it doesn't matter. If it really
bothers you, I can probably be convinced to invest the effort necessary
to dig up references to linguistics literature....
7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B