| Author |
Message |
Mike Barnes
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2005 1:56 am
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
In uk.culture.language.english, danilla wrote:
| Quote: | The Americans have made it simple. They spell all the words in the
subject (and alike) with z.
|
Except for:
advertise, advise, arise, chastise, circumcise, comprise, compromise,
demise, despise, devise, disguise, enterprise, excise, exercise,
(dis/en)franchise, improvise, incise, merchandise, premise, reprise,
revise, rise, supervise, surmise, surprise, televise. (At least,
they're *almost* always spelled that way: "advertize",
"merchandize", and "surprize" ARE listed in some U.S. college
dictionaries, but are not the usual forms anywhere.) A useful
mnemonic is that, except "improvise", none of these make nouns in
"-isation", "-ization", or "-ism". (Exceptions in the other
direction are "aggrandize", "capsize", "recognize", and verbs from
which no verb "-ization" has been formed because the parent or
cognate noun already had the desired meaning.)
Thanks to Mark Israel for that list.
http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
--
Mike Barnes
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Giles Todd
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2005 6:27 am
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 11:42:33 GMT, "John Briggs"
<john.briggs4@ntlworld.com> wrote:
| Quote: | But a CD-ROM (or DVD) is a 'disc' - the Americans having failed to invent
it. And my laser disc player says "LaserDisc" on it 
|
I'm old enough to remember floppy disks or 'diskettes'. While I used
to prefer the 'disc' spelling, I am uncomfortable with 'discette', so
nowadays I stick with 'disk'. It has to be better than the 'disc ->
disquette' alternative.
Giles |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Briggs
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2005 6:31 am
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
Giles Todd wrote:
| Quote: | On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 11:42:33 GMT, "John Briggs"
john.briggs4@ntlworld.com> wrote:
But a CD-ROM (or DVD) is a 'disc' - the Americans having failed to
invent it. And my laser disc player says "LaserDisc" on it :-)
I'm old enough to remember floppy disks or 'diskettes'. While I used
to prefer the 'disc' spelling, I am uncomfortable with 'discette', so
nowadays I stick with 'disk'. It has to be better than the 'disc -
disquette' alternative.
|
But the point is that the Americans invented the diskettes, so got to name
them.
--
John Briggs
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Giles Todd
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2005 7:15 am
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 00:31:08 GMT, "John Briggs"
<john.briggs4@ntlworld.com> wrote:
| Quote: | But the point is that the Americans invented the diskettes, so got to name
them.
|
IBM (an American manufacturer of machines supposedly designed to aid
business administration) also invented a direct access storage device
called the 'IBM 350 Disk Storage Unit' in the mid-1950s. See
http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/storage/storage_350.html
Quote:
The 350 Disk Storage Unit consisted of the magnetic disk memory unit
with its access mechanism, the electronic and pneumatic controls for
the access mechanism, and a small air compressor. Assembled with
covers, the 350 was 60 inches long, 68 inches high and 29 inches
deep. It was configured with 50 magnetic disks containing 50,000
sectors, each of which held 100 alphanumeric characters, for a
capacity of 5 million characters.
Disks rotated at 1,200 rpm, tracks (20 to the inch) were recorded at
up to 100 bits per inch, and typical head-to-disk spacing was 800
microinches. The execution of a "seek" instruction positioned a
read-write head to the track that contained the desired sector and
selected the sector for a later read or write operation. Seek time
averaged about 600 milliseconds.
Not a 'disc' in sight. Only disks.
Modern hard disks are direct descendants of IBM's disk-based DASDs, in
particular the 'Winchester' disk system introduced in the early 1970s.
In the early 1980s, the rare and expensive hard disks available for
microcomputers (that for the Rair Black Box in 1981 consisted of a
14-inch platter with a capacity of 8 Megabytes unformatted, 5
Megabytes formatted under CP/M, and cost around GBP 20,000) were still
referred to as 'Winchester' disks in publications such as Personal
Computer World in the UK and Byte in the USA.
'Disk' came first, 'diskette' came second when a word for a wee floppy
one was needed, and 'disc' was applied as an afterthought by the
hypercorrect.
OED2 plumps for 'disk' being an earlier and better spelling, but
acknowledges that 'disc' was more common in British English in 1989
except when referring to computer disks. Much like the distinction
between 'program' and 'programme'.
Giles |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Mountifield
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2005 12:35 pm
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
In article <_5Sse.19841$a5.17161@newsfe5-win.ntli.net>,
John Briggs <john.briggs4@ntlworld.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Although the Winchester disk was presumably developed at IBM Hursley Park,
Winchester.
|
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_disk:
"In 1973, IBM introduced the 3340 "Winchester" disk system (the 30MB + 30 millisecond access time led the project to be named after the Winchester 30-30 rifle)..."
Other online references seem to agree.
Cheers
Tony
--
Tony Mountifield
Work: tony@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk
Play: tony@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Briggs
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2005 3:48 pm
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
Giles Todd wrote:
| Quote: | On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 00:31:08 GMT, "John Briggs"
john.briggs4@ntlworld.com> wrote:
But the point is that the Americans invented the diskettes, so got
to name them.
IBM (an American manufacturer of machines supposedly designed to aid
business administration) also invented a direct access storage device
called the 'IBM 350 Disk Storage Unit' in the mid-1950s. See
http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/storage/storage_350.html
Quote:
The 350 Disk Storage Unit consisted of the magnetic disk memory unit
with its access mechanism, the electronic and pneumatic controls for
the access mechanism, and a small air compressor. Assembled with
covers, the 350 was 60 inches long, 68 inches high and 29 inches
deep. It was configured with 50 magnetic disks containing 50,000
sectors, each of which held 100 alphanumeric characters, for a
capacity of 5 million characters.
Disks rotated at 1,200 rpm, tracks (20 to the inch) were recorded at
up to 100 bits per inch, and typical head-to-disk spacing was 800
microinches. The execution of a "seek" instruction positioned a
read-write head to the track that contained the desired sector and
selected the sector for a later read or write operation. Seek time
averaged about 600 milliseconds.
Not a 'disc' in sight. Only disks.
Modern hard disks are direct descendants of IBM's disk-based DASDs, in
particular the 'Winchester' disk system introduced in the early 1970s.
In the early 1980s, the rare and expensive hard disks available for
microcomputers (that for the Rair Black Box in 1981 consisted of a
14-inch platter with a capacity of 8 Megabytes unformatted, 5
Megabytes formatted under CP/M, and cost around GBP 20,000) were still
referred to as 'Winchester' disks in publications such as Personal
Computer World in the UK and Byte in the USA.
'Disk' came first, 'diskette' came second when a word for a wee floppy
one was needed, and 'disc' was applied as an afterthought by the
hypercorrect.
OED2 plumps for 'disk' being an earlier and better spelling, but
acknowledges that 'disc' was more common in British English in 1989
except when referring to computer disks. Much like the distinction
between 'program' and 'programme'.
|
You are still missing the point that 'disc' is used for optical media
because their inventors spoke a different variety of English from those of
magnetic media :-)
Although the Winchester disk was presumably developed at IBM Hursley Park,
Winchester.
--
John Briggs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robin Bignall
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2005 6:03 pm
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 18:47:34 +0100, Peter Duncanson
<mail@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
| Quote: | On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 15:03:53 GMT, "John Briggs" <john.briggs4@ntlworld.com
wrote:
Tony Mountifield wrote:
In article <JGyse.27689$iy2.27223@newsfe1-gui.ntli.net>,
John Briggs <john.briggs4@ntlworld.com> wrote:
Paul Burke wrote:
danilla wrote:
And how about something like program/programme? Is the latter used
exclusively or not?
To me, programming a computer is an international activity, and I
use 'program'. I also use 'disk' out of weariness, and 'analog'
because I think the -ue form is silly.
But a CD-ROM (or DVD) is a 'disc' - the Americans having failed to
invent it. And my laser disc player says "LaserDisc" on it :-)
The distinction that was explained to me was "disk" for magnetic media
and "disc" for optical media.
Yes, but that's only because the Americans invented the "disk" (and
"diskette"), but failed to do so for the 'compact disc'. (The videodisc -
later laser disc - was an analogue predecessor of the compact disc.)
Way back in the 1960s, there were two US manufacturers of fixed disc/disk
drives. The disks were 2 to 3 feet in diameter.
The makers were Control Data (Control Data Corporation, CDC), and Data
Products (Data Products Corporation, DPC).
CDC used the spelling Disk; DP used Disc.
|
Ahem. IBM was making fixed disk drives back in the 1950s, and ever
since.
http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/650/650_tr2.html
"The following is the text of an undated IBM Data Processing Division
press technical fact sheet. It probably was distributed in 1959.
The IBM RAMAC 650 electronic data processing system combines the
capabilities of the world's most widely-used computer with the
flexibility of random-sequence data availability. Two basic elements
make up the RAMAC 650- --an IBM 650 data processing system and an IBM
355 magnetic disk memory file."
--
Robin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
David Picton
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2005 10:08 pm
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
Paul Burke wrote:
| Quote: | danilla wrote:
Can you tell me a simple rule? Is there one, at all?
Etymologically, most -ise words derive from Greek -izein, with a zeta.
So the z form would be truer to the origin. But 'z's are considered ugly
in England, so have been quietly ushered out, like an alcoholic uncle at
a wedding.
|
That's an explanation I haven't seen before - Brits have a general
dislike for the letter 'z'. I don't see any tendency for people to
write 'prise' instead of 'prize' (e.g. competition prize) or 'sise'
instead of size. So I think that the aversion is to the -ize suffix,
because it's (wrongly in my view) seen as an Americanism.
I think there's another reason for the popularity of -ise endings in
England. Once the -ise endings came to be used alongside the -ize
ones, people lost track of which words can only be spelt in -ise (e.g.
compromise, advertise). So many people went for the safe option: use
-ise for everything e.g. realise, advertise.
> Paul Burke |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Brian {Hamilton Kelly}
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 1:26 am
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
On 17 Jun, in article
<1119000382.294036.225870@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
danilla@pisem.net "danilla" wrote:
| Quote: | Hello.
The Americans have made it simple. They spell all the words in the
subject (and alike) with z. As for the British spelling I seem to have
seen both variants. For example, realize, as I know, is spelled with z.
I don't think I've ever seen another word with z rather than s by
British authors. But who knows...
Can you tell me a simple rule? Is there one, at all?
|
Have you tried looking at standard works of reference, such as Fowler's
MEU?
As someone later in the thread has said, the Americans use the correct
spellings of those verbs that do NOT derive from words that were
originally ending in -izein in Greek, and for the rest they also use the
correct spelling, with a -ize.
For example, the verb "televise", deriving from "television" (which is
itself a hybrid of Greek and Latin that was much criticized 80-odd years
ago) has never been anywhere near a Greek -izein verb, and therefore uses
-ise in both BrEnglish and AmEnglish.
Many years ago I was told that the Americans take the trouble to teach
their schoolchildren which words MUST be spelt with -ise, and therefore
they also know that the remainder SHOULD be spelt with -ize.
The English, following King Lear's exhortation "Out! Whoreson Zed",
assume that the -ize spelling is American (and therefore to be shunned).
Whereas in reality, it's the -ise spelling that is out of place, being a
relic of Gallic misspellings when the Norman French first came to govern
the English.
--
Brian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk
"Je n'ai fait celle-ci plus longue que parce que je n'ai pas eu
le loisir de la faire plus courte."
Blaise Pascal, /Lettres Provinciales/, 1657 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Brian {Hamilton Kelly}
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 1:35 am
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
On Friday, in article <d8uj57$aqa$1@softins.clara.co.uk>
tony@softins.clara.co.uk "Tony Mountifield" wrote:
| Quote: | In article <JGyse.27689$iy2.27223@newsfe1-gui.ntli.net>,
John Briggs <john.briggs4@ntlworld.com> wrote:
Paul Burke wrote:
danilla wrote:
And how about something like program/programme? Is the latter used
exclusively or not?
To me, programming a computer is an international activity, and I use
'program'. I also use 'disk' out of weariness, and 'analog' because I
think the -ue form is silly.
But a CD-ROM (or DVD) is a 'disc' - the Americans having failed to invent
it. And my laser disc player says "LaserDisc" on it :-)
The distinction that was explained to me was "disk" for magnetic media
and "disc" for optical media.
|
That might be apparent distinction, but it's not the complete story. The
optical media (firstly LaserDisc, then Compact Disc, and nowadays Digital
Versatile Disc) were all created by consortia in which the Dutch company
Philips were involved. Philips is a powerfull presence in electronics in
Europe, and has been for more than a century. They originated in the
Netherlands, but have either subsidiary copmpanies or partners in many
other European countries, especially the UK. So when they *patented* the
aforementioned technologies, they not only patented them with the
spelling "disc", but made it a condition of production under licence from
those patents that the spelling "disc" shall be used exclusively. Which
is why that spelling appears on any CD that you pick up.
--
Brian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk
"Je n'ai fait celle-ci plus longue que parce que je n'ai pas eu
le loisir de la faire plus courte."
Blaise Pascal, /Lettres Provinciales/, 1657 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Brian {Hamilton Kelly}
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 1:42 am
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
On Friday, in article <3hgkd6Fh32eaU1@individual.net>
einde.ocallaghan@planet-interkom.de "Einde O'Callaghan"
wrote:
| Quote: | If a word has one or two syllables it's usually spelled with "s" in both
|
I've never heard any such rule. The only one I know is "did it
originally, or through derivation via Latin or other languages, originate
in a Greek verb ending in -izein". You are the first person I have ever
heard mention anything to do with the number of syllables.
| Quote: | British and American English, e.g. "rise", "surprise". However "prise"
and "prize" are two different words.
|
Jane Austen famously (and erroneously) wrote "surprize".
| Quote: | If it it has three or more syllables it can be spelled with either "ize"
or "ise" in British English and with "ize" only in American English, e.g
"organise/organize". There are, however, a few exceptions which are
always spelled with "ise", e.g. "advertise", "televise".
|
Quite; see my other post (and Fowler).
| Quote: | This is about the only area where American spelling is more "difficult"
than British spelling, as you can always use "s" in Britain, even if
some publishers frown on it, e.g. Times Newspapers or Oxford University
Press, although the latter isn't consistent.
|
Sadly, whilst The Thuderer's house style used to insist upon the correct
-ize ending, since Murdoch bought them out 30-odd years ago, they've
forgotten most parts of their proud heritage, including this rule.
Summary: using -ise in BrEnglish is purely down to laziness, because the
teaching system doesn't bother to provide guidance as to the handful of
verbs that MUST be spelt with -ise instead of -ize.
As an Irishman, what does IRL's teaching system do about this question?
--
Brian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk
"Je n'ai fait celle-ci plus longue que parce que je n'ai pas eu
le loisir de la faire plus courte."
Blaise Pascal, /Lettres Provinciales/, 1657 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Brian {Hamilton Kelly}
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 1:50 am
Post subject: Re: program/programme |
|
|
On Friday, in article <d8ubea$9nn$1@softins.clara.co.uk>
tony@softins.clara.co.uk "Tony Mountifield" wrote:
| Quote: | In article <1119005378.509244.119840@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
danilla <danilla@pisem.net> wrote:
And how about something like program/programme? Is the latter used
exclusively or not?
To me, a computer program is something I run on a computer, and a
computer programme is something I watch on TV about computers.
I remember discussing this very point with a colleague back in 1984,
and he suggested there was actually an "official" distinction along
these lines, but didn't mention a source.
|
Way back (probably in the mid-1960s), the British Computer Society
suggested that the spelling "Program" be reserved in BrEnglish for
computer programs, whilst "Programme" be retained for all other usages,
such as the programme one buys when visiting a theatre or other event, or
a TV/radio programme, etc.
ISTR that they were successful in getting their recommendation enshrined
in BSI publication (but couldn't tell you which British Standard it might
be). Nevertheless, the majority of the UK's print media remain ignorant
of the recommendation, and persist in referring to "computer programmes"
(just as they also persist in referring to "the internet", without the
capital letter which designates it as a proper noun).
Personally, I find the distinction very useful, and admit to seeing an
ambiguity in AmEnglish's espousal of "program" for both contexts.
--
Brian {Hamilton Kelly} bhk@dsl.co.uk
"Je n'ai fait celle-ci plus longue que parce que je n'ai pas eu
le loisir de la faire plus courte."
Blaise Pascal, /Lettres Provinciales/, 1657 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Giles Todd
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 5:45 am
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 09:48:42 GMT, "John Briggs"
<john.briggs4@ntlworld.com> wrote:
| Quote: | You are still missing the point that 'disc' is used for optical media
because their inventors spoke a different variety of English from those of
magnetic media
|
True enough. David Gregg's 'VIDEODISK' (sic) was described as a
'disc' in the patent application. Dutch and Japanese companies did
the rest of the damage.
Giles |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Giles Todd
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 6:27 am
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 20:54:30 +0200, Einde O'Callaghan
<einde.ocallaghan@planet-interkom.de> wrote:
| Quote: | If a word has one or two syllables it's usually spelled with "s" in both
British and American English, e.g. "rise", "surprise". However "prise"
and "prize" are two different words.
|
'Size' can be an absolute bastard sometimes. You can spell it both
ways, meaning the same thing, with the option of 'sice' as well, and
still have a case to argue in news.
Giles |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Einde O'Callaghan
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 2:26 pm
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
Brian {Hamilton Kelly} wrote:
| Quote: | On Friday, in article <3hgkd6Fh32eaU1@individual.net
einde.ocallaghan@planet-interkom.de "Einde O'Callaghan"
wrote:
If a word has one or two syllables it's usually spelled with "s" in both
I've never heard any such rule. The only one I know is "did it
originally, or through derivation via Latin or other languages, originate
in a Greek verb ending in -izein". You are the first person I have ever
heard mention anything to do with the number of syllables.
You'll find this rule, for example, in Michael Swan's Practical English |
Usage.
| Quote: |
British and American English, e.g. "rise", "surprise". However "prise"
and "prize" are two different words.
Jane Austen famously (and erroneously) wrote "surprize".
If it it has three or more syllables it can be spelled with either "ize"
or "ise" in British English and with "ize" only in American English, e.g
"organise/organize". There are, however, a few exceptions which are
always spelled with "ise", e.g. "advertise", "televise".
Quite; see my other post (and Fowler).
This is about the only area where American spelling is more "difficult"
than British spelling, as you can always use "s" in Britain, even if
some publishers frown on it, e.g. Times Newspapers or Oxford University
Press, although the latter isn't consistent.
Sadly, whilst The Thuderer's house style used to insist upon the correct
-ize ending, since Murdoch bought them out 30-odd years ago, they've
forgotten most parts of their proud heritage, including this rule.
Summary: using -ise in BrEnglish is purely down to laziness, because the
teaching system doesn't bother to provide guidance as to the handful of
verbs that MUST be spelt with -ise instead of -ize.
But "realise/realize", for instance, doesn't derive from a Greek root. |
It's root is Latin through and through.
We also don't ask with most other words whether they have a Latin or
Greek root in order to work out hwo they are spelled. Indeed some of the
more absurd spellings with silent letters are the result of over-erudite
etymological studies. For instance, the "b" in "debt " and the "l" in
"salmon" have never ever been pronounced in English and writers like
Chaucer and Shakespeare were quite happy with "dette" and "saumon" or
"samoun".
To be honest, why should it be necessary to study Latin and Greek to
work out how to spell a syllable and indeed only this one syllable, no
matter how common it is) when the pronunciation of the syllable is
identical in Modern English - indeed in any version of english since
these words were picked up from Norman French? Very few of these words
have come directly into English from Greek, in which case there might be
a serious case for arguing for the "-ize" from origin.
| Quote: | As an Irishman, what does IRL's teaching system do about this question?
I seem to recall that my English teacher, a very learned man, pointed to |
the controversy but suggested that it was a bit pedantic to insist on
the "-ize" spelling simply on the basis that the word supposedly derived
from Greek. He was the one who made me aware of the irrationality of
this rule with reference to "realise/realize". He argued for consistency
of usage and would not accept it if people used "-ize" (or one of its
derivatives) for one multi-syllable word and "-ise" for another in the
same text except, of course, for those words that are never spelled with
"-ize".
As a teacher of English as a foreign language I teach my students to be
consistent in their usage. They have difficulty enough with the vagaries
of English spelling without burdening them with rather abstruse
arguments about Latin and Greek roots, particularly since most of them
have studied neither Latin nor Greek.
Regards, Einde O'Callaghan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in