PDA

View Full Version : [Dixonary] OT sort of: I am curious (dealing)


Dodi Schultz
October 22nd, 2006, 04:21 PM
>> In a multicultural environment where we might do things differently
>> and also given 'n' (where n= 2831) different dictionaries and the
>> internet...

Oh, true, John--and boy, can THAT be confusing. (I will have some
interesting comment vis-à-vis the real def when this round is over.) But I
didn't mean matters of substance, i.e., somewhat differing defs. Or even
style, as long as it's an accepted one (e.g., "Scot" vs "Scots," or whether
some etymological notes come first, last, or as part of the def).

>> I always ask re spellings like 'sulphur' and 'colour' and
>> 'aluminium' (and I often ask the dealer to standardise mine to
>> American unless it is self evident to me that mine has to be
>> English).

I agree with that, and since most of the players are American and so am I,
I do standardize to US spelling. (And usage; where you used single quotes
above, for instance, they'd be double here.) It wouldn't bother me, though,
if you or another player over there, when dealing, standardised all the
defs to UK.

When I'm not sure--and I'm NOT always sure; sometimes a spelling looks
weird to me and it turns out to be perfectly correct--I look it up. BTW, I
just looked up a usage in your message quoted above, and it should be
"self-evident," with a hyphen (both UK and US dictionaries say so). I'd
definitely fix it if it appeared in a submitted def. (I've already capped
the "E" in "English"; didn't have to look that up.)

--Dodi

Tony Abell
October 23rd, 2006, 10:29 AM
On 2006-10-23 at 05:42 bonnyjars wrote:

b> An example is "The Union flag is red, white, and blue". (Also called the
b> 'serial' or 'Havard' comma and is, I think, unknown in languages apart from
b> English.) For myself, not being one of the 'wise clerkes of Oxenford' I find
b> that example quaint and archaic if not actually incorrect. If I am in edit
b> mode then I would always correct it by removing it. Another difference
b> between us is where the full-stop goes in that example sentence.

This use of the comma is very unusual in US English. I was taught not to use a
comma before and in a list unless omitting it would create an ambiguity.

However, I was indeed taught to put punctuation marks inside the quotes even if
they aren't part of the quote, though nowadays I usually disobey that rule
because I dislike it (probably the result of decades of writing software having
made my interpretation of quotation very literal).

I have a question for you on the topic of grammar differences between the US and
UK. I recently found myself getting into an online argument with a UK native who
insisted that the phrases "goats milk" and "cows milk" were perfectly correct,
citing the large number of hits on a Google search as evidence. I was claiming
that they should be "goat's milk" and "cow's milk", but then thought I might be
making a dangerous assumption about grammar and usage being more similar across
the Atlantic than they really are, and I immediately dropped any further
discussion. So who was right?

Paul Keating
October 23rd, 2006, 12:41 PM
Tony Abell >> I was claiming that they should be "goat's milk" and "cow's
milk"

And I would write _goats' milk_ and _cows' milk_. (Not one goat, therefore
not _goat's_.)

But if using it attributively, I might write _goatsmilk cheese_, to avoid
the fussy correctness of _goats'-milk cheese_. (Then again, I might just run
away from the problem entirely and write _chèvre_.)

--
Paul Keating
The Hague