Talk:Three-letter rule

message: Contributors calling this a "rule" have no concept of the difference betwen a rule and a rule-of-thumb. --Wetman 06:17, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: As the sole contributor to date, I can assure you I did not coin either of the names for the...er...phenomenon.  I'm not sure, but I think you might have to blame Otto Jespersen. Joestynes 07:01, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Rule or rule of thumb?

message: This "rule" is not a particularly astute observation either:
a 	article                                    	F
I 	pronoun                                    	F?
o 	interjecction?                             	F?
ab	noun (abdominal muscle)                    	C
ad	noun                                       	C
ah	interjection                               	F?
Al	proper name                                	C
am	auxiliary verb                             	F?
an	article                                    	F
as	preposition, conjunction                   	F
at	preposition                                	F
ax	noun                                       	C
be	auxiliary verb                             	F?
bi	adjective (bisexual)                       	C
Bo	proper name                                	C
by	preposition                                	F
Cy	proper name                                	C
Di	proper name                                	C
do	verb, auxiliary verb, solfege              	F??
Ed	proper name                                	C
eh	interjection                               	F?
em	noun (unit of width)                       	C
en	noun (unit of width)                       	C
er	interjection                               	F?
et	conjunction (loan from Latin)              	F
fa	solfege                                    	C?
go	verb, noun (loan from Japanese)            	C
ha	interjection                               	F?
he	pronoun, interjection                      	F?
hi	greeting                                   	F??
hm	interjection                               	F?
ho	interjection, noun                         	F?, C
id	noun (loan from Latin)                     	C
if	conjunction                                	F
in	preposition                                	F
Io	proper name                                	C
is	auxiliary verb                             	F?
it	pronoun                                    	F?
Jo	proper name                                	C
la	solfege                                    	C
Li	proper name                                	C
lo	interjection                               	F?
ma	noun                                       	C
me	pronoun                                    	F?
mi	solfege                                    	C
Mo	proper name                                	C
mu	noun (Greek letter)                        	C
my	determiner                                 	F?
no	interjection?, determiner                  	F?
nu	noun (Greek letter)                        	C
of	preposition                                	F
oh	interjection                               	F?
om	interjection                               	F?
on	preposition                                	F
or	conjunction                                	F
ox	noun                                       	C
Oz	proper name                                	C
pi	noun (Greek letter)                        	C
Ra	proper name                                	C
re	noun/preposition (loan from Latin), solfege	F??, C
so	conjunction, adverb                        	F, C?
ti	solfege                                    	C
to	preposition, particle                      	F
uh	interjection                               	F?
um	interjection                               	F?
up	preposition, adverb, noun                  	F, C
us	pronoun                                    	F?
we	pronoun                                    	F?
xi	noun (Greek letter)                        	C
ya	pronoun                                    	F?
ye	pronoun, determiner                        	F?
yo	interjection, greeting                     	F??
That's not looking good, no matter where you draw the distinction between function words and content words. --MarkSweep 01:17, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, if you're listing words by frequencey, of course you'll get the function words near the top. But as I read it, the rule seems to be about type frequency (i.e. how many two-letter words occur in a dictionary), not token frequency (how often they occur in running text). Regarding Jespersen, should there be a remark in the article about him?  Is Jespersen the ultimate source of this rule?  Re "rule", I have nothing against this piece of jargon, it's just that the earlier version talked about this rule being "enforced", which made it seem like a positive law that someone was enforcing, rather than an empirical observation that is to some extent supported (did you mean "reinforced"?) by data. --MarkSweep 06:05, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's not simply a random coincidence producing a marginal mnemonic.  There were processes at work in the 15th-18th centuries to encourage the distinction, which explain why "egg" isn't written "eg".  Most exceptions postdate that time.  I'll try to add some more detail when I can check it up (I'm not certain it was Jespersen, for one thing; if it was, it was far from his most significant observation).  Joestynes 08:32, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The current version is much improved, especially regarding the historical aspects. The rule makes sense as a(n) historical principle used at a time when English orthography was still in flux. --MarkSweep 19:14, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exceptions overwhelm the "rule" 

message: Huh?  It looks to me as if both occurrences of "he(e)" appear on the ictus.  —Blotwell 14:55, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paradise Lost example 

message: since English spelling is very conservative, such examples would need to concern "content words" that did not use to be polysyllabic. These will be rather hard to find. Methinks the 'rule' would be better described by saying that some very frequent 'function words' had their spelling reduced to two letters, be < beon, if < gif, do < don, and some had less than three letters already in OE, such as ic, to, he, me. It is pointless to argue that "content words" could be spelled with fewer letters if they never were (queue, night, sleigh). Most homophones aren't homographs not because of some orthographical decision, but because they haven't been homophones for more than 300 years or so. dab (𒁳) 19:50, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I take your point.  However, when constructing the list of examples I specifically checked in the OED to pick words where a 2-letter spelling is attested.  If a Middle English or Early modern English spelling without the "redundant" third letter is attested, then it gives credence to the three-letter rule, regardless of how the word was pronounced or spelled further back in the history of English.  I don't personally discount your theory, but in keeping with Wikipedia ban on Original Research, you need independent attestation of your critique.  I have reverted your edits acordingly. jnestorius(talk) 14:58, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: examples of "augmentation"