0
Usenet Posted 23 years ago
Usage
Supersede
Out of curiousity, I just googled for the frequency of the erroneous "supercede". (I'd inadvertently written it again as "-cede": even though I know* it's not spelled that way, and I even know *why it's not spelled that way, it still pops out like that now and then. Bit of a recurring blind spot.)
The strange thing is that google didn't flag it as an error when I searched for "supercede", it didn't ask "Do you mean supersede ?"
Odd, that. Is "supercede" considered an acceptable variant in some circles?
Cheers, Harvey
Ottawa/Toronto/Edmonton for 30 years;
Southern England for the past 21 years.
(for e-mail, change harvey to whhvs)
The strange thing is that google didn't flag it as an error when I searched for "supercede", it didn't ask "Do you mean supersede ?"
Odd, that. Is "supercede" considered an acceptable variant in some circles?
Cheers, Harvey
Ottawa/Toronto/Edmonton for 30 years;
Southern England for the past 21 years.
(for e-mail, change harvey to whhvs)
Top answer
The inimitable Harvey Van Sickle (Email Removed) stated one day [nq:1]Out of curiousity, I just googled for the frequency of the erroneous "supercede". (I'd inadvertently written it again as "-cede": ... " Odd, that.
- The inimitable Harvey Van Sickle (Email Removed) stated one day [nq:1]Out of curiousity, I just googled for the frequency of the erroneous "supercede".
- (I'd inadvertently written it again as "-cede": ...
- " Odd, that.
- [/nq] W3NID has it listed as a variant of "supersede".
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
16 Answers
0
The inimitable Harvey Van Sickle (Email Removed) stated one day
[nq:1]Out of curiousity, I just googled for the frequency of the erroneous "supercede". (I'd inadvertently written it again as "-cede": ... it didn't ask "Do you mean supersede ?" Odd, that. Is "supercede" considered an acceptable variant in some circles?[/nq]
W3NID has it listed as a variant of "supersede".
[nq:1]Out of curiousity, I just googled for the frequency of the erroneous "supercede". (I'd inadvertently written it again as "-cede": ... it didn't ask "Do you mean supersede ?" Odd, that. Is "supercede" considered an acceptable variant in some circles?[/nq]
W3NID has it listed as a variant of "supersede".
00
[nq:1]Out of curiousity, I just googled for the frequency of the erroneous "supercede". (I'd inadvertently written it again as "-cede": ... it didn't ask "Do you mean supersede ?" Odd, that. Is "supercede" considered an acceptable variant in some circles?[/nq]
Yeah, I remember learning that here before. Merriam-Webster has it as a variant, and as I recall, a number of other dictionaries do, to
Yeah, I remember learning that here before. Merriam-Webster has it as a variant, and as I recall, a number of other dictionaries do, to
00
-snip re: google doesn't flag up "supercede"-
[nq:2]Odd, that. Is "supercede" considered an acceptable variant in some circles?[/nq]
[nq:1]Yeah, I remember learning that here before. Merriam-Webster has it as a variant, and as I recall, a number of other dictionaries do, too.[/nq]
Ah: I missed that discussion.
Did it establish if the acceptance as a variant rather than recording it
[nq:2]Odd, that. Is "supercede" considered an acceptable variant in some circles?[/nq]
[nq:1]Yeah, I remember learning that here before. Merriam-Webster has it as a variant, and as I recall, a number of other dictionaries do, too.[/nq]
Ah: I missed that discussion.
Did it establish if the acceptance as a variant rather than recording it
00
[nq:1]On 18 Oct 2003, Donna Richoux wrote[/nq]
[nq:1]-snip re: google doesn't flag up "supercede"-[/nq]
[nq:2]Yeah, I remember learning that here before. Merriam-Webster has it as a variant, and as I recall, a number of other dictionaries do, too.[/nq]
[nq:1]Ah: I missed that discussion. Did it establish if the acceptance as a variant rather than recording it as ... not shy about accep
[nq:1]-snip re: google doesn't flag up "supercede"-[/nq]
[nq:2]Yeah, I remember learning that here before. Merriam-Webster has it as a variant, and as I recall, a number of other dictionaries do, too.[/nq]
[nq:1]Ah: I missed that discussion. Did it establish if the acceptance as a variant rather than recording it as ... not shy about accep
00
[nq:1]Odd, that. Is "supercede" considered an acceptable variant in some circles?[/nq]
M-W 11 lists supercede under its own entry, merely as a variant of supersede, but it doesn't list it as an alternate spelling in the supersede entry. I find that strange.
Dena Jo
(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)
M-W 11 lists supercede under its own entry, merely as a variant of supersede, but it doesn't list it as an alternate spelling in the supersede entry. I find that strange.
Dena Jo
(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)
00
[nq:2]Odd, that. Is "supercede" considered an acceptable variant in some circles?[/nq]
[nq:1]M-W 11 lists supercede under its own entry, merely as a variant of supersede, but it doesn't list it as an alternate spelling in the supersede entry. I find that strange.[/nq]
I read that as meaning "We think you might see and want to look it up; but if you already know it's we don't want to give
[nq:1]M-W 11 lists supercede under its own entry, merely as a variant of supersede, but it doesn't list it as an alternate spelling in the supersede entry. I find that strange.[/nq]
I read that as meaning "We think you might see and want to look it up; but if you already know it's we don't want to give
00
[nq:1]I read that as meaning "We think you might see and want to look it up; but if you already know it's we don't want to give you the idea that is acceptable."[/nq]
People after my own heart!
Dena Jo
(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)
People after my own heart!
Dena Jo
(Email: Replace TPUBGTH with denajo2)
00
[nq:1]Out of curiousity, I just googled for the frequency of the erroneous "supercede". (I'd inadvertently written it again as "-cede": ... flag it as an error when I searched for "supercede", it didn't ask "Do you mean supersede ?"(snip)[/nq]
Does Google suggest alternatives only for things it considers errors? Google has once or twice suggested incorrect alternatives to my correct searches,
Does Google suggest alternatives only for things it considers errors? Google has once or twice suggested incorrect alternatives to my correct searches,
00
[nq:1](Burchfield who's not shy about accepting variants classes it as an error even though he notes early forms with a "c".)[/nq]
Ummm, she's a she, Harvey.
aokay
Ummm, she's a she, Harvey.
aokay
00
[nq:2](Burchfield who's not shy about accepting variants classes it as an error even though he notes early forms with a "c".)[/nq]
[nq:1]Ummm, she's a she, Harvey.[/nq]
Robert Burchfield? The OED New Zealander/editor of the New Fowler's?
Did he do a Jan Morris while I wasn't looking?
Cheers, Harvey
Ottawa/Toronto/Edmonton for 30 years;
Southern England for the pas
[nq:1]Ummm, she's a she, Harvey.[/nq]
Robert Burchfield? The OED New Zealander/editor of the New Fowler's?
Did he do a Jan Morris while I wasn't looking?
Cheers, Harvey
Ottawa/Toronto/Edmonton for 30 years;
Southern England for the pas
0
Related Questions