#1007922 false positive spelling: substract and subtract is both correct

Package:
lintian
Source:
lintian
Submitter:
Thomas Koch
Date:
2026-04-09 02:33:01 UTC
Severity:
normal
Tags:
#1007922#5
Date:
2022-03-18 15:00:44 UTC
From:
To:
According to Webster, substract and subtract are both correct:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/subtract
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/substract

This needs to be fixed in this file around lines 11052-11056 at current
master: data/spelling/corrections
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=8Brh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
#1007922#10
Date:
2022-03-18 17:19:44 UTC
From:
To:
Thomas Koch <thomas@koch.ro> writes:

Just FYI, the OED marks it as "Now nonstandard and rare" and the
Collaborative International Dictionary of English (the dictionary behind
the dict command) marks it as obsolete.  I'm fairly certain that at least
in US English it would be commonly marked as a spelling mistake.  (aspell
with the default Debian dictionaries does so, for instance.)  I don't know
about UK English.

I have no opinion about whether Lintian should mark it as a spelling
mistake, but I would recommend avoiding it in favor of the more standard
subtract spelling.
#1007922#15
Date:
2022-03-18 18:25:07 UTC
From:
To:
Hi Thomas,

Where did you see that word?

Yeah, I'm with Russ. I found "sub-S-tract" in the 1913 Webster's
Dictionary but no longer in Webster's Second from 1960. (Finally,
those dusty volumes found some use.) I have never heard, or seen, that
form of "sub-tract," but let's give others a chance to chime in.

Kind regards,
Felix Lechner
#1007922#20
Date:
2022-06-10 03:19:05 UTC
From:
To:
Hi,

Felix Lechner wrote:

Writing "substract" instead of "subtract" seems to be a German thing.

I also tend to write "substract" instead of "subtract". I suspect that
this is because in German there are a lot of binding "s" in compound
words where it eases pronounciation. And indeed, pronouncing
"subtract" without "s" feels a lot more difficult than "substract" for
me. Actually I think we have the same issue in German itself: I would
say "Substrahieren", but correct is "Subtrahieren".

Another reason might be the similarity to words like the German
"Substrat" or the English word "substrate" (which both mean the same).

		Regards, Axel
#1007922#25
Date:
2023-02-05 20:58:15 UTC
From:
To:
I like the idea of keeping the spelling correction in place.  I've never seen "substract" being used.  Keeping the correction reduces ambiguity and keeps language consistent.

Motion to close.

Sincerely,

Brian
#1007922#34
Date:
2025-03-21 04:06:14 UTC
From:
To:
The spelling-error-in-binary tag will be lowered to a severity of
experimental in the next upload, and may be removed later on.