Birth of Words

Counter-intuitively and a frustrating mistake that always seems adraft now and then, is the trivial fact that spoken languages are unlike dead languages, and that non-dead languages are very much alive and find themselves in a continuous morphological struggle with their guarantors. As it may be obvious, one would have thought that there is only one correct way to boil an egg, and with the point of Europe excused, as it stands, mistakes are unfathomably necessary for a language to achieve its full livelyhood; or, for the theologically-inclined, how can you mistake that which is dead? If you do, then it is alive!

Subjectively speaking, if you were the only one in the planet, anyone to whom you would have spoken, would have understood you without even needing to check. So, let's take a look at this French word:

• succès

it happens to mean the following, that compared to the former, you will now understand because it is now in English:

• succeed

And yet when you look at yet another French word:

• précéder

which you might just understand in English as:

• preceed

you might be able to see the pattern. And yet, nobody would need this when you can just verbalize your needs and the whole planet will understand.