[Dixonary] OT: Original Word Choice

[Guerri Stevens]

My original plan for round 2152's word was RETICLE. I ran it by my
husband, who knew it and said he thought a lot of people would know it.
So - how many of you would have known it? And no, the lady's handbag is
reticule.

--
Guerri

[Chris Carson]

Guerri,

I would have been a DQ for reticle, having run across it as it pertains to gunsights.

Chris

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 30, 2010, at 7:52 PM, Guerri Stevens <guerri (AT) tapcis (DOT) com> wrote:

> My original plan for round 2152's word was RETICLE. I ran it by my husband, who knew it and said he thought a lot of people would know it. So - how many of you would have known it? And no, the lady's handbag is reticule.
>
> --
> Guerri
>

[Daniel B. Widdis]

I wouldda DQd.

--
Dan

-----Original Message-----
From: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com [mailto:dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com] On Behalf
Of Guerri Stevens
Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2010 4:52 PM
To: Google Dixonary
Subject: [Dixonary] OT: Original Word Choice

My original plan for round 2152's word was RETICLE. I ran it by my
husband, who knew it and said he thought a lot of people would know it.
So - how many of you would have known it? And no, the lady's handbag is
reticule.

--
Guerri

[Dodi Schultz]

Guerri Stevens wrote:

> My original plan for round 2152's word was RETICLE. I ran it by my
> husband, who knew it and said he thought a lot of people would know
> it. So - how many of you would have known it? And no, the lady's
> handbag is reticule.

Not I--and how come you didn't save it for your next turn as dealer?

[Judy Madnick]

As usual, I wouldn't have had a clue!

Sent from my iPod


>
>
>>

[stamps]

We had reticles in our microscopes in high school biology.

--
Salsgiver.com Webmail

Fiber Optic Internet and Voice are here!
Find out more at http://www.gotlit.com


---------- Original Message -----------
From: Guerri Stevens <guerri (AT) tapcis (DOT) com>
To: Google Dixonary <dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com>
Sent: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 19:52:27 -0400
Subject: [Dixonary] OT: Original Word Choice

> My original plan for round 2152's word was RETICLE. I ran it by my
> husband, who knew it and said he thought a lot of people would know
> it. So - how many of you would have known it? And no, the lady's
> handbag is reticule.
>
> --
> Guerri
------- End of Original Message -------

[Guerri Stevens]

Because as you can see, my husband was right, and at least 3 people
would have known it.

Guerri

Dodi Schultz wrote:
>
> Not I--and how come you didn't save it for your next turn as dealer?
>
>

[Judy Madnick]

From: "Dodi Schultz" <DodiSchultz (AT) nasw (DOT) org>

<< I can now see that, and I need to do something about my pitiful
<< vocabulary!

Mine's worse. <sigh>

Judy

[Dodi Schultz]

Guerri wrote:

> Because as you can see, my husband was right, and at least 3 people
> would have known it.

I can now see that, and I need to do something about my pitiful vocabulary!

--Dodi

[Chuck]

Guerri -

a DQ from me is in sight.

Guerri Stevens wrote:
> My original plan for round 2152's word was RETICLE. I ran it by my
> husband, who knew it and said he thought a lot of people would know
> it. So - how many of you would have known it? And no, the lady's
> handbag is reticule.
>

[Chuck]

Not to mention microscopes, and maybe even telescopes . . .

Chris Carson wrote:
> Guerri,
>
> I would have been a DQ for reticle, having run across it as it pertains to gunsights.
>
> Chris
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 30, 2010, at 7:52 PM, Guerri Stevens <guerri (AT) tapcis (DOT) com> wrote:
>
>
>> My original plan for round 2152's word was RETICLE. I ran it by my husband, who knew it and said he thought a lot of people would know it. So - how many of you would have known it? And no, the lady's handbag is reticule.
>>
>> --
>> Guerri
>>
>>
>
>
>

[Tony Abell]

Your husband was right. Anyone who has had exposure to science or engineering in
an area where any kind of optical device having an eyepiece is used will likely
be familiar with reticles.


------------------------------------------
On 2010-10-30 at 19:52 Guerri Stevens wrote:

> My original plan for round 2152's word was RETICLE. I ran it by my
> husband, who knew it and said he thought a lot of people would know it.
> So - how many of you would have known it? And no, the lady's handbag is
> reticule.

[Guerri Stevens]

I was familiar with the term, but associated it with gun sights, and
eventually looked it up. My dictionary's definition is more generic.

Guerri

Tony Abell wrote:
> Your husband was right. Anyone who has had exposure to science or engineering in
> an area where any kind of optical device having an eyepiece is used will likely
> be familiar with reticles.

[Dave Cunningham]

I thunk "reticule" was a purse, and "reticle" a measuring device for a
microscope or magnifier.


Dave

On Oct 30, 7:52*pm, Guerri Stevens <gue... (AT) tapcis (DOT) com> wrote:
> My original plan for round 2152's word was RETICLE. I ran it by my
> husband, who knew it and said he thought a lot of people would know it.
> So - how many of you would have known it? And no, the lady's handbag is
> reticule.
>
> --
> Guerri

[Paul Keating]

Holden Caulfield said the same sort of thing, as I recall not once but
often. It's always struck me that there was scant evidence for it in his
narration.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dodi Schultz
Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2010 2:49 PM
To: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com
Subject: Re: [Dixonary] OT: Original Word Choice

Guerri wrote:

> Because as you can see, my husband was right, and at least 3 people would
> have known it.

I can now see that, and I need to do something about my pitiful vocabulary!

--Dodi

[Paul Keating]

OED (draft revision March 2010) says reticule is an uncommon synonym for reticle in the sense of grid or crosshairs in an eyepiece, with a citations from 1728 to 1990.

The etymology of the two is identical and pretty transparent (L., rēticulum, diminutive of rēte net) so this is not surprising.

It’s a case of incomplete differentiation, in Fowler's sense: two forms of identical origin that are in the process of subdividing the semantic field between them. He gives spiritual~spirituous as words differentiated now that were 18th C synonyms.

The reticle~reticule differentiation is unlikely ever to be complete because reticule in the sense of handbag/purse is now only to be found in historical novels. Often in Georgette Heyer; but only 5 times in Dickens, once each in Thomas Hardy and Henry James, and not that I know of in Jane Austen.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Cunningham

I thunk "reticule" was a purse, and "reticle" a measuring device for a microscope or magnifier.

[Daniel B. Widdis]

I would venture to guess that I’m probably the only player who would have associated ‘reticle’ with a submarine periscope. Now that I see the derivation I remember that the hash marks, or “divisions� on the crosshairs are/were called reticles.

--
Dan

From: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com [mailto:dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com] On Behalf Of Paul Keating
Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2010 4:39 PM
To: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com
Subject: Re: [Dixonary] Re: OT: Original Word Choice

OED (draft revision March 2010) says reticule is an uncommon synonym for reticle in the sense of grid or crosshairs in an eyepiece, with a citations from 1728 to 1990.

The etymology of the two is identical and pretty transparent (L., rēticulum, diminutive of rēte net) so this is not surprising.

It’s a case of incomplete differentiation, in Fowler's sense: two forms of identical origin that are in the process of subdividing the semantic field between them. He gives spiritual~spirituous as words differentiated now that were 18th C synonyms.

The reticle~reticule differentiation is unlikely ever to be complete because reticule in the sense of handbag/purse is now only to be found in historical novels. Often in Georgette Heyer; but only 5 times in Dickens, once each in Thomas Hardy and Henry James, and not that I know of in Jane Austen.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Cunningham

I thunk "reticule" was a purse, and "reticle" a measuring device for a microscope or magnifier.

[Daniel B. Widdis]

DS> Why is stuff from some of you--well, specifically, Paul and Dan--coming
through looking like this .

I blame whatever font/encoding Paul used. My client just replied using the
same font/encoding. Those were quotation marks and/or apostrophes.

--
Dan

[Dodi Schultz]

Why is stuff from some of you--well, specifically, Paul and Dan--coming
through looking like this (can others see that apostrophes and quotes
have been replaced by symbols?):

> I would venture to guess that IâEUR^(TM)m probably the only player who
> would have associated âEUR~reticleâEUR^(TM) with a submarine
> periscope. Now that I see the derivation I remember that the hash
> marks, or âEURoedivisionsâEUR? on the crosshairs are/were called reticles.
>

--Dodi

[EnDash@aol.com]

I sometimes get text with the same peculiarity from other sources. I
suspect it is a PC/Mac encoding thing.

-- Dick


In a message dated 10/31/2010 10:30:38 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
DodiSchultz (AT) nasw (DOT) org writes:

Why is stuff from some of you--well, specifically, Paul and Dan--coming
through looking like this (can others see that apostrophes and quotes have
been replaced by symbols?):



I would venture to guess that I’m probably the only player who would
have associated ‘reticle’ with a submarine periscope. Now that I see
the derivation I remember that the hash marks, or “divisions� on the
crosshairs are/were called reticles.


--Dodi

[Toni Savage]

I'm totally startled that TRET didn't get a lot of DQ's.* Although I haven't
seen it in a while, it used to be VERY common in crossword puzzles!
*-- Toni Savage



----- Original Message ----
From: Guerri Stevens <guerri (AT) tapcis (DOT) com>
To: Google Dixonary <dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com>
Sent: Sat, October 30, 2010 7:52:27 PM
Subject: [Dixonary] OT: Original Word Choice

My original plan for round 2152's word was RETICLE. I ran it by my husband, who
knew it and said he thought a lot of people would know it. So - how many of you
would have known it? And no, the lady's handbag is reticule.

-- Guerri

[John Barrs]

Just for the record I would also have been DQ on either or both the grid for
focus or the lady's purse - both meanings are known to me for both spellings
(with or without the u)

JohnnyB

On 31 October 2010 00:52, Guerri Stevens <guerri (AT) tapcis (DOT) com> wrote:

> My original plan for round 2152's word was RETICLE. I ran it by my husband,
> who knew it and said he thought a lot of people would know it. So - how many
> of you would have known it? And no, the lady's handbag is reticule.
>
> --
> Guerri
>

[Dodi Schultz]

Toni Savage wrote:

> I'm totally startled that TRET didn't get a lot of DQ's. Although I haven't seen it in a while, it used to be VERY common in crossword puzzles!
>

That's how I recognized it.

--Dodi

[Paul Keating]

I don’t deliberately use unsavoury characters in my emails, though I admit I no longer try to remember which characters DOS knew about and which not. If I happen to type a character that DOS did not know about, my email client will send the message as Unicode, encoded as UTF-8, which represents non-ascii characters as a one-byte escape followed by a code of usually two bytes. For Europeans this is routine. It’s not possible, for example, to send an email with the euro symbol in it any other way. In this particular case, my email went out in Unicode because it had e-macron in it.

The sequence a-circumflex euro-symbol trademark-symbol that I see quoted here is an artefact of your email client. It happened (more or less) this way.

Dan typed a foot-mark (ascii 39 or “straight quote”) and his email client substituted an apostrophe on the fly (and it’s quite hard to stop a modern Windows email client from doing that, because it does whatever you have asked Word to do).

That apostrophe isn’t in the ascii character set. It does have a representation in the Windows 1252 character set, but because Dan was replying to me, and my message was sent as Unicode, so was his.

The apostrophe is represented in UTF-8 as a 3-byte sequence. Your email client, instead of translating the 3-byte sequence back into an apostrophe (which it should have done, because the header told it that the message was in UTF-8), instead interpreted the 3 bytes as 3 characters drawn from the Windows 1252 character set. Which looks a bit weird.

Like me, you prefer to use an email interface rather than going to the Google group. But nonetheless I suggest going there, just once, to see how it has correctly handled my message and Dan’s response, and woefully mangled yours: the sequence a-circumflex euro-symbol trademark-symbol that your client shows you, and you quote, appears there as i-diaeresis inverted-query one-half E U R circumflex left-paren T M right-paren. Whew!

--
Paul Keating
The Hague


From: Dodi Schultz
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 4:32 AM
To: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com
Subject: Re: [Dixonary] Re: OT: Original Word Choice


Why is stuff from some of you--well, specifically, Paul and Dan--coming through looking like this (can others see that apostrophes and quotes have been replaced by symbols?):


I would venture to guess that I’m probably the only player who would have associated ‘reticle’ with a submarine periscope. Now that I see the derivation I remember that the hash marks, or “divisions� on the crosshairs are/were called reticles.


--Dodi

[Tim B]

> The apostrophe is represented in UTF-8 as a 3-byte sequence. Your email client, instead of
> translating the 3-byte sequence back into an apostrophe (which it should have done, because the
> header told it that the message was in UTF-8), instead interpreted the 3 bytes as 3 characters
> drawn from the Windows 1252 character set. Which looks a bit weird.

If it's a Thunderbird problem, it's only in the Windows version. I'm using Thunderbird with Linux,
and all these messages look fine here.

Best wishes,
Tim B.

[Judy Madnick]

From: "Paul Keating" <pjakeating (AT) gmail (DOT) com>

<< That apostrophe isn’t in the ascii character set. It does have a
<< representation in the Windows 1252 character set, but
<< because Dan was replying to me, and my message was sent
<< as Unicode, so was his.

Does Thunderbird allow you to choose whether you read messages as text rather than HTML? Is it possible that there's a setting that will allow Dodi to see the "curly" apostrophe? Tim mentioned that he's using Thunderbird, which is what made me think there may be a setting issue.

Just a thought (from someone who knows a lot less about this than you do!!),

Judy

[Dodi Schultz]

Thanks, Paul, although I have absolutely no idea what you're talking
about. My e-mail client is Thunderbird; it runs on Windows, not DOS.

--Dodi

[Paul Keating]

Ok, I'll put it another way. You are seeing funny characters instead of
apostrophes because Thunderbird is misinterpreting the data it is getting.
It is getting Unicode (and it knows that because Dan's message declared its
encoding) but it is acting as if it is getting Latin-1.

I'm no Thunderbird expert but I gather you could try looking at Tools |
Options | Display | Formatting | Fonts. The menu sequence is version
dependent so it might differ from yours a bit. If "Apply the default
character encoding to all incoming messages" is checked then uncheck it.

If that isn't it then maybe someone who knows more about Thunderbird than I
do can help.


-----Original Message-----
From: Dodi Schultz
Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 6:09 PM
To: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com
Subject: Re: [Dixonary] Re: OT: Original Word Choice


Thanks, Paul, although I have absolutely no idea what you're talking
about. My e-mail client is Thunderbird; it runs on Windows, not DOS.

--Dodi

[Tim B]

> Does Thunderbird allow you to choose whether you read messages as text rather than HTML?

Yes, it does. I have mine set at text, and only change that if a message is unreadable.

Best wishes,
Tim B.

[Dodi Schultz]

Paul Keating wrote:

> Ok, I'll put it another way. You are seeing funny characters instead
> of apostrophes because Thunderbird is misinterpreting the data it is
> getting. It is getting Unicode (and it knows that because Dan's
> message declared its encoding) but it is acting as if it is getting
> Latin-1.
>
> I'm no Thunderbird expert but I gather you could try looking at Tools
> | Options | Display | Formatting | Fonts. The menu sequence is version
> dependent so it might differ from yours a bit. If "Apply the default
> character encoding to all incoming messages" is checked then uncheck it.

Paul, thanks! I did find that menu sequence and did what you suggested.
If you still have that stuff that came through funny for me, please
send it again, and we'll see what happens . . .

--Dodi