<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google is NOT a verb</title>
	<atom:link href="http://theimponderableone.wordpress.com/2008/06/01/google-is-not-a-verb/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://theimponderableone.wordpress.com/2008/06/01/google-is-not-a-verb/</link>
	<description>The Blog for People like me.....always thinking.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:42:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Logan</title>
		<link>http://theimponderableone.wordpress.com/2008/06/01/google-is-not-a-verb/#comment-151</link>
		<dc:creator>Logan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2009 17:39:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theimponderableone.wordpress.com/?p=131#comment-151</guid>
		<description>The idea of whether or not &quot;google&quot; should be formally adopted as a verb by organizations like MW is simply a question. Are you a linguistic prescriptivist? Then no, google should not be a verb, because language should follow prescribed rules.

Are you a linguistic descriptivist? Then yes, google is a verb because thousands or millions of people are already using it that way and language evolves organically.

It&#039;s all just a matter of whether you like to follow rules or to write them.  :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The idea of whether or not &#8220;google&#8221; should be formally adopted as a verb by organizations like MW is simply a question. Are you a linguistic prescriptivist? Then no, google should not be a verb, because language should follow prescribed rules.</p>
<p>Are you a linguistic descriptivist? Then yes, google is a verb because thousands or millions of people are already using it that way and language evolves organically.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s all just a matter of whether you like to follow rules or to write them.  <img src='http://s.wordpress.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SKaReCRoW</title>
		<link>http://theimponderableone.wordpress.com/2008/06/01/google-is-not-a-verb/#comment-127</link>
		<dc:creator>SKaReCRoW</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2008 23:26:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theimponderableone.wordpress.com/?p=131#comment-127</guid>
		<description>Honestly I have no idea how google became so popular.  From my experience with them, their results have always been severely lacking.  You could search for &quot;shoe&quot; and get a video of a fish falling out of an airplane instead.  Their results have NEVER been accurate.  True, they are MUCH better than they used to be, but how they came to be so popular is beyond me.

However they came to be is besides the point.  The point is that you are absolutely correct.  Google is NOT a verb!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Honestly I have no idea how google became so popular.  From my experience with them, their results have always been severely lacking.  You could search for &#8220;shoe&#8221; and get a video of a fish falling out of an airplane instead.  Their results have NEVER been accurate.  True, they are MUCH better than they used to be, but how they came to be so popular is beyond me.</p>
<p>However they came to be is besides the point.  The point is that you are absolutely correct.  Google is NOT a verb!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
