Talk:build

build/built

I have noticed recently a few instances of someone writing "build" when I think from the context they should have written "built". Example sentence: “By ‘not free of errors’ I mean blatant errors regarding physics and natural law, as well as gross misinterpretation of facts, due to an obvious lack of fundamental and basic understanding of the way nuclear reactors are build and operated.” (original at [1]; emphasis added.) Is this an accepted variant usage in some dialects of English, or a mildly-common error? 99.177.172.109 00:54, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

That's what I would call a 'typo'. Jamesjiao → ^{T ◊ C} 01:04, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Etymology

Is this a cognate/related to DE bilden? 66.112.119.247 11:39, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

No, definitely not. The English verb descends from *buþlijaną, while Bild descends from *biliþją. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 01:36, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Huh... I'd never thought about it, just considered it obvious that they were the same. Like I haven't actively compared the etymologies of, say, "bring" and "bringen" or "swim" and "schwimmen". Interesting that they are false cognates. (I'm not the one who asked that question.) Of course, the German verb doesn't mean "to construct", but they do overlap in a lot of senses. 92.218.236.35 07:33, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

standard of construction

the standard of construction of something such as a vehicle
Microsoft® Encarta® 2009

--Backinstadiums (talk) 12:58, 19 November 2019 (UTC)