Use of word people versus persons
Vocaboly.com Forum Index Vocaboly.com
Vocabulary builder software for SAT, TOEFL, GRE, GMAT and more
 
 FAQFAQ   MemberlistMemberlist   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
 
Google
 
Web www.vocaboly.com
Use of word people versus persons
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Vocaboly.com Forum Index -> alt.english.usage
Author Message
Zephir Woodwood
Guest





Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2004 9:51 am    Post subject: Use of word people versus persons Reply with quote

I read some text in an infection control document today. "They are easily
dispersed in air currents and transmitted when susceptible people inhale
contaminated air."
Is the use of "people" acceptable? What is wrong with substituting
"persons"?
Thank you
[Crossposted to alt.english.usage]

Back to top
CyberCypher
Guest





Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2004 10:06 am    Post subject: Re: Use of word people versus persons Reply with quote

Zephir Woodwood wrote on 29 Sep 2004:

Quote:
I read some text in an infection control document today. "They
are easily dispersed in air currents and transmitted when
susceptible people inhale contaminated air."
Is the use of "people" acceptable?

Quite acceptable, and even preferred by the American Medical
Association Manual of Style.

Quote:
What is wrong with substituting "persons"?

Style. Medical publishers have been publishing documents filled with
stilted language for far too long. The authors, editors, and publishers
who care about language use prefer to use as much everday English as
possible in order to make what is published as clear and as easy to
read and understand as possible.

And, just for the record, corporations are legal "persons" but *not*
legal "people".

Quote:
[Crossposted to alt.english.usage]




--
Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor
For email, replace numbers with English alphabet.
Back to top
Zephir Woodwood
Guest





Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2004 10:12 am    Post subject: Re: Use of word people versus persons Reply with quote

"CyberCypher" <cybercypher@19-16-25-13-01-03.com> wrote in message
news:Xns95737B3D84D9Bcctxt2002@130.133.1.4...
Quote:
Zephir Woodwood wrote on 29 Sep 2004:
I read some text in an infection control document today. "They
are easily dispersed in air currents and transmitted when
susceptible people inhale contaminated air."
Is the use of "people" acceptable?
Quite acceptable, and even preferred by the American Medical
Association Manual of Style.
What is wrong with substituting "persons"?
Style. Medical publishers have been publishing documents filled with
stilted language for far too long. The authors, editors, and publishers
who care about language use prefer to use as much everday English as
possible in order to make what is published as clear and as easy to
read and understand as possible.
And, just for the record, corporations are legal "persons" but *not*
legal "people".
Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor
For email, replace numbers with English alphabet.
thank you


Back to top
Adrian Bailey
Guest





Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2004 1:38 pm    Post subject: Re: Use of word people versus persons Reply with quote

"Zephir Woodwood" <zwnospam1965@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ojq6d.7759$5O5.1190@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Quote:
I read some text in an infection control document today. "They are easily
dispersed in air currents and transmitted when susceptible people inhale
contaminated air."
Is the use of "people" acceptable? What is wrong with substituting
"persons"?
Thank you

"People are People" http://www.lyricsfreak.com/d/depeche-mode/39333.html

Adrian
Back to top
Django Cat
Guest





Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2004 2:02 pm    Post subject: Re: Use of word people versus persons Reply with quote

On 29 Sep 2004 04:06:50 GMT, CyberCypher
<cybercypher@19-16-25-13-01-03.com> wrote:

Quote:
Zephir Woodwood wrote on 29 Sep 2004:

I read some text in an infection control document today. "They
are easily dispersed in air currents and transmitted when
susceptible people inhale contaminated air."
Is the use of "people" acceptable?

Quite acceptable, and even preferred by the American Medical
Association Manual of Style.

What is wrong with substituting "persons"?

Style. Medical publishers have been publishing documents filled with
stilted language for far too long. The authors, editors, and publishers
who care about language use prefer to use as much everday English as
possible in order to make what is published as clear and as easy to
read and understand as possible.

And, just for the record, corporations are legal "persons" but *not*
legal "people".


That's interesting Franke - so in (US?) law an entity has to be considered
as equivalent to being an individual so that responsibility can be
assigned?
DC
Back to top
CyberCypher
Guest





Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2004 3:41 pm    Post subject: Re: Use of word people versus persons Reply with quote

Django Cat wrote on 29 Sep 2004:
[...]
Quote:
That's interesting Franke - so in (US?) law an entity has to be
considered as equivalent to being an individual so that
responsibility can be assigned?

I don't know the reasoning behind making corporations legal persons.
There are a couple of lawyers here who could probably tell you. Bob
Leiblich surely would have were he still here.

--
Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor
For email, replace numbers with English alphabet.
Back to top
Michael Nitabach
Guest





Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2004 10:49 pm    Post subject: Re: Use of word people versus persons Reply with quote

CyberCypher <cybercypher@19-16-25-13-01-03.com> wrote in
news:Xns9573B4096F3DEcctxt2002@130.133.1.4:

Quote:
Django Cat wrote on 29 Sep 2004:
[...]
That's interesting Franke - so in (US?) law an entity has to be
considered as equivalent to being an individual so that
responsibility can be assigned?

I don't know the reasoning behind making corporations legal persons.

One reason is so that courts can have jurisdiction over them.

--
Mike Nitabach
Back to top
Don Aitken
Guest





Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2004 11:13 pm    Post subject: Re: Use of word people versus persons Reply with quote

On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 11:49:56 -0500, Michael Nitabach
<mnitabach@acedsl.com> wrote:

Quote:
CyberCypher <cybercypher@19-16-25-13-01-03.com> wrote in
news:Xns9573B4096F3DEcctxt2002@130.133.1.4:

Django Cat wrote on 29 Sep 2004:
[...]
That's interesting Franke - so in (US?) law an entity has to be
considered as equivalent to being an individual so that
responsibility can be assigned?

I don't know the reasoning behind making corporations legal persons.

One reason is so that courts can have jurisdiction over them.

It isn't a new, or a specifically American, thing. All the common-law
countries have it. Originally it needed a special statute or a Royal
Charter; incorporation by administrative procedure came in in the 19th
century in England.

--
Don Aitken

Mail to the addresses given in the headers is no longer being
read. To mail me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com".
Back to top
Pat Durkin
Guest





Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 12:17 am    Post subject: Re: Use of word people versus persons Reply with quote

"Don Aitken" <don-aitken@freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:tlqll0l2uue6npv88sajiq938mtadjc8ga@4ax.com...
Quote:
On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 11:49:56 -0500, Michael Nitabach
mnitabach@acedsl.com> wrote:

CyberCypher <cybercypher@19-16-25-13-01-03.com> wrote in
news:Xns9573B4096F3DEcctxt2002@130.133.1.4:

Django Cat wrote on 29 Sep 2004:
[...]
That's interesting Franke - so in (US?) law an entity has to be
considered as equivalent to being an individual so that
responsibility can be assigned?

I don't know the reasoning behind making corporations legal persons.

One reason is so that courts can have jurisdiction over them.

It isn't a new, or a specifically American, thing. All the common-law
countries have it. Originally it needed a special statute or a Royal
Charter; incorporation by administrative procedure came in in the 19th
century in England.

Taxability.

Liability in civil actions.
Probably a few more. Corporations are, in a sense, immortal. I expect just
keeping some controls on them is only human.
Back to top
Raymond S. Wise
Guest





Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 12:50 am    Post subject: Re: Use of word people versus persons Reply with quote

"Pat Durkin" <durkinpa@peoplepc.com> wrote in message
news:I_C6d.7111$Ki1.4512@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Quote:

"Don Aitken" <don-aitken@freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:tlqll0l2uue6npv88sajiq938mtadjc8ga@4ax.com...
On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 11:49:56 -0500, Michael Nitabach
mnitabach@acedsl.com> wrote:

CyberCypher <cybercypher@19-16-25-13-01-03.com> wrote in
news:Xns9573B4096F3DEcctxt2002@130.133.1.4:

Django Cat wrote on 29 Sep 2004:
[...]
That's interesting Franke - so in (US?) law an entity has to be
considered as equivalent to being an individual so that
responsibility can be assigned?

I don't know the reasoning behind making corporations legal persons.

One reason is so that courts can have jurisdiction over them.

It isn't a new, or a specifically American, thing. All the common-law
countries have it. Originally it needed a special statute or a Royal
Charter; incorporation by administrative procedure came in in the 19th
century in England.

Taxability.

Liability in civil actions.
Probably a few more. Corporations are, in a sense, immortal. I expect
just
keeping some controls on them is only human.


I've seen that very aspect, potential immortality, used in an argument as
one reason to abolish legal personhood for corporations (part of the overall
argument that a corporation should not be given the legal status of a person
because it is so very different from a person).


--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA

E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com
Back to top
Spehro Pefhany
Guest





Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 1:32 am    Post subject: Re: Use of word people versus persons Reply with quote

On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 13:50:28 -0500, the renowned "Raymond S. Wise"
<mplsrayNOSPAM@gbronline.com> wrote:

Quote:

I've seen that very aspect, potential immortality, used in an argument as
one reason to abolish legal personhood for corporations (part of the overall
argument that a corporation should not be given the legal status of a person
because it is so very different from a person).

As you say, "potential immortality". Among other ways they can die,
Corporations can be subject to the death penalty (having their charter
revoked) for such crimes as not filing tax returns promptly.

The movie "The Corporation" sounds like an interesting exploration of
the subject.

http://www.thecorporation.com/about/


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
Back to top
Skitt
Guest





Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 3:46 am    Post subject: Re: Use of word people versus persons Reply with quote

CyberCypher wrote:
Quote:
Django Cat wrote:

That's interesting Franke - so in (US?) law an entity has to be
considered as equivalent to being an individual so that
responsibility can be assigned?

I don't know the reasoning behind making corporations legal persons.
There are a couple of lawyers here who could probably tell you. Bob
Leiblich surely would have were he still here.

It's hard to stomach seeing Bob's name spelled that way. Not lovely at all.
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/
Back to top
CyberCypher
Guest





Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 5:41 am    Post subject: Re: Use of word people versus persons Reply with quote

Skitt wrote on 30 Sep 2004:

Quote:
CyberCypher wrote:
Django Cat wrote:

That's interesting Franke - so in (US?) law an entity has to be
considered as equivalent to being an individual so that
responsibility can be assigned?

I don't know the reasoning behind making corporations legal
persons. There are a couple of lawyers here who could probably
tell you. Bob Leiblich surely would have were he still here.

It's hard to stomach seeing Bob's name spelled that way. Not
lovely at all.

The other way isn't lovely either. I've always had trouble with the
"ei"/"ie" combination is people's names. I guess it's because I never
learned phonics: I learned German instead. I don't know how his name is
pronounced. Is it [lai] as in "pie" or [li] as in "tea"?

--
Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor
For email, replace numbers with English alphabet.
Back to top
Skitt
Guest





Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 6:18 am    Post subject: Re: Use of word people versus persons Reply with quote

CyberCypher wrote:
Quote:
Skitt wrote:
CyberCypher wrote:

I don't know the reasoning behind making corporations legal
persons. There are a couple of lawyers here who could probably
tell you. Bob Leiblich surely would have were he still here.

It's hard to stomach seeing Bob's name spelled that way. Not
lovely at all.

The other way isn't lovely either. I've always had trouble with the
"ei"/"ie" combination is people's names. I guess it's because I never
learned phonics: I learned German instead. I don't know how his name
is pronounced. Is it [lai] as in "pie" or [li] as in "tea"?

But German is why I wrote what I did. Leib = stomach (belly, actually),
Liebe = love.
Maybe I should have said that your spelling went belly up in a very unlovely
way.

Bob's name (as well as "Liebe") is pronounced with an ee sound. "Leib" has
sort of an "eye" sound.
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/
Back to top
CyberCypher
Guest





Posted: Thu Sep 30, 2004 6:28 am    Post subject: Re: Use of word people versus persons Reply with quote

Skitt wrote on 30 Sep 2004:

Quote:
CyberCypher wrote:
Skitt wrote:
CyberCypher wrote:

I don't know the reasoning behind making corporations legal
persons. There are a couple of lawyers here who could probably
tell you. Bob Leiblich surely would have were he still here.

It's hard to stomach seeing Bob's name spelled that way. Not
lovely at all.

The other way isn't lovely either. I've always had trouble with
the "ei"/"ie" combination is people's names. I guess it's because
I never learned phonics: I learned German instead. I don't know
how his name is pronounced. Is it [lai] as in "pie" or [li] as in
"tea"?

But German is why I wrote what I did. Leib = stomach (belly,
actually), Liebe = love.
Maybe I should have said that your spelling went belly up in a
very unlovely way.

It's been a long, long time since I've seriously read or written any
German. I've forgotten almost everything I knew.

One of my problems with names is names that end in "stein". Some
people in New Jersey pronounce them to rhyme with "mine" and others
pronounce them to rhyme with "mean".

Quote:
Bob's name (as well as "Liebe") is pronounced with an ee sound.

Thank you for that info. Maybe now I'll get it right next time.

Quote:
"Leib" has sort of an "eye" sound.


--
Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor
For email, replace numbers with English alphabet.
Back to top
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Vocaboly.com Forum Index -> alt.english.usage All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



Office Forum Access Forum Electronics Windows Server Exchange Server
New Topics Powered by phpBB