I want to turn it off entirely, but the “smart” hitboxes for the digital keyboard are also so imprecise that I rely on autocorrect to accommodate my fat fingers.
I want to turn it off entirely, but the “smart” hitboxes for the digital keyboard are also so imprecise that I rely on autocorrect to accommodate my fat fingers.
When is it correct to use compound words in english? In Swedish you can do compound words for anything at will. In English “flagpole” is its own word but “dirt farmer” isn’t.
There is no rule. It’s just chaos. The dictionaries can’t even agree.
True there is no consistent rule, but generally the more a phrase is used, the more often it becomes a compound word
Welp! Better go convince some more people to become destitute agricultural workers so that the dictionary is less confusing to us Scandinavians!
All it is is whether a compound word is common enough.
It starts in speech when the words are repeated next to each other often enough they start being thought of as one word. But can’t be shortened.
If, in context, every time we said farmer we ended up saying dirt farmer. It would become compound. But in reality we’d just end up saying “farmer” when the context makes it clear. You’ll see this in writing about farming all the time, initially stating the type of farmer then just saying farmer.
Flag pole started out separately, but in some conversations it would become one object. Every time we talked about the flag pole it would be one word, flagpole. But saying just “pole” would be ambiguous. There are other poles around.
It trends towards shortness, if context allows us to drop a word altogether we will, if it doesn’t it gets compounded abbreviated.
No formal rule for this at all, but that’s the way it happens. People try to say things more efficiently without confusing meaning.