You must log in or register to comment.
Isn’t that right in the definition of the word? They co-operate to form a word.
Cooperating means working together to accomplish a goal, sometimes by doing different tasks; not necessarily just doing the same thing and duplicating effort, as would be the case if they made the same sound.
If anything, we should be casting shade at that lazy hyphen who ducked out early instead of sticking around to make the etymology clear.
Cooperating, to make a barrel.
That one took me a moment… 😁
As a native english speaker, english is stupid.
As a native Slavic language speaker, wanna trade your tense system for our noun cases?
My native has 19 cases with 2-3 variations of each for vowel harmony. Plus verbs are partially conjugated for both the subject and the object, so I see you, you see me, they see it are all one word sentences each, just conjugated differently. I see myself is a two word sentence though, with both words conjugated.Other simple sentences are also collapsed into conjugation hell, “You could take me home” is one such heavily conjugated word.
But no genders, and only two and a half temporal tenses, and pronunciation is directly matched to text, no pronunciation guides or spelling bees.
As an attentive English student, I must disagree.
And yet they exist side by side in the same word. Pretty much the definition
Doesn’t prevent them from working together.
Unity in Diversity
Historically you would use the umlaut (lit. re-sound in German) to signify that both vowels are pronounced separately and not as a diphthong! I think some publications, like The New Yorker, are pretentious enough to still use it… In this case, cooperate would be spelled coöperate.
Edit: Oops! Meant to reply to Geek_King
That’s extremely pretentious, I’m impressed!
co(ope)rate
Anyone else occasionally pronounce it like the “cuperate” in recuperate
Anyone get stuck and confused by “insisted”?
You mean like step-sister stuck or two different vowels gaining sentience and expressing themselves stuck?
Yes
