Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The late merge method, also known as zipper merging, dictates that both streams of traffic should continue to drive up to the point of closure of one stream and merge at the marked taper. Both streams should create alternating gaps (like the teeth of a zipper) into which vehicles from the other stream can merge at the merge point (thus "zipping ...
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
The shift causes the vowel sound in words like cot, nod and stock and the vowel sound in words like caught, gnawed and stalk to merge into a single phoneme; therefore the pairs cot and caught, stock and stalk, nod and gnawed become perfect homophones, and shock and talk, for example, become perfect rhymes.
In a typological scheme first systematized by Henry M. Hoenigswald in 1965, a historical sound law can only affect a phonological system in one of three ways: . Conditioned merger (which Hoenigswald calls "primary split"), in which some instances of phoneme A become an existing phoneme B; the number of phonemes does not change, only their distribution.
The Low-Back-Merger Shift is a chain shift of vowel sounds found in several dialects of North American English, beginning in the last quarter of the 20th century and most significantly involving the low back merger accompanied by the lowering and backing of the front lax vowels: / æ /, / ɛ /, and / ɪ / (in words like TRAP, DRESS, and KIT respectively).
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
In terms of a merge-base theory of language acquisition, complements and specifiers are simply notations for first-merge (read as "complement-of" [head-complement]), and later second-merge (read as "specifier-of" [specifier-head]), with merge always forming to a head. First-merge establishes only a set {a, b} and is not an ordered pair.
Manual merging is also required when automatic merging runs into a change conflict; for instance, very few automatic merge tools can merge two changes to the same line of code (say, one that changes a function name, and another that adds a comment). In these cases, revision control systems resort to the user to specify the intended merge result.