| Author |
Message |
David
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 2:31 pm
Post subject: Re: program/programme |
|
|
In article <20050618.2350.60286snz@dsl.co.uk>, Brian {Hamilton Kelly}
<bhk@dsl.co.uk> wrote:
| Quote: | 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.
|
[Snip]
| Quote: | Personally, I find the distinction very useful, and admit to seeing
an ambiguity in AmEnglish's espousal of "program" for both contexts.
|
So, it's a programme of events for the evening's entertainment at the
theatre but a program of events for the computer. By that reasoning
you'd have to talk about the colour of the pages in the theatre
programme but the color of the pages on the theatre's web site,
wouldn't you?
--
http://www.dacha.freeuk.com/joachim/02-0.htm
When Joachim was born, on the stroke of midnight,
it took the midwife no more than a single look
to restore her wavering faith in the Adversary.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
John Briggs
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 2:38 pm
Post subject: Re: program/programme |
|
|
David wrote:
| Quote: | In article <20050618.2350.60286snz@dsl.co.uk>, Brian {Hamilton Kelly}
bhk@dsl.co.uk> wrote:
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.
[Snip]
Personally, I find the distinction very useful, and admit to seeing
an ambiguity in AmEnglish's espousal of "program" for both contexts.
So, it's a programme of events for the evening's entertainment at the
theatre but a program of events for the computer. By that reasoning
you'd have to talk about the colour of the pages in the theatre
programme but the color of the pages on the theatre's web site,
wouldn't you?
|
Or should that be website? (The theater's website, of course  )
--
John Briggs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony Mountifield
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 7:47 pm
Post subject: Re: program/programme |
|
|
In article <4d7d5f2b1edavid@dacha.freeuk.com>,
David <david@dacha.freeuk.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
So, it's a programme of events for the evening's entertainment at the
theatre but a program of events for the computer. By that reasoning
you'd have to talk about the colour of the pages in the theatre
programme but the color of the pages on the theatre's web site,
wouldn't you?
|
Well even we Brits have to spell it "color" when writing HTML or CSS :-(
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 |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 19, 2005 8:20 pm
Post subject: Re: program/programme |
|
|
Brian {Hamilton Kelly} <bhk@dsl.co.uk> wrote:
| Quote: | On Friday, in article <d8ubea$9nn$1@softins.clara.co.uk
To me, a computer program is something I run on a computer, and a
computer programme is something I watch on TV about computers.
I remember discussing this very point with a colleague back in 1984,
and he suggested there was actually an "official" distinction along
these lines, but didn't mention a source.
Way back (probably in the mid-1960s), the British Computer Society
suggested that the spelling "Program" be reserved in BrEnglish for
computer programs, whilst "Programme" be retained for all other usages,
such as the programme one buys when visiting a theatre or other event, or
a TV/radio programme, etc.
ISTR that they were successful in getting their recommendation enshrined
in BSI publication (but couldn't tell you which British Standard it might
be). Nevertheless, the majority of the UK's print media remain ignorant
of the recommendation, and persist in referring to "computer programmes"
(just as they also persist in referring to "the internet", without the
capital letter which designates it as a proper noun).
|
Well, it is not really the job of the BSI to lay down spelling
guidelines for English. Having said that, various standards for
computer languages do lay down the use of the spelling 'program'
as a keyword within the computer language (examples are Pascal and
'PROGRAM-ID' in Cobol, no doubt there are many others).
Axel |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Duncanson
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 20, 2005 10:04 pm
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 13:03:29 +0100, Robin Bignall <docrobin@ntlworld.com>
wrote:
| Quote: | On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 18:47:34 +0100, Peter Duncanson
mail@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 15:03:53 GMT, "John Briggs" <john.briggs4@ntlworld.com
wrote:
Tony Mountifield wrote:
In article <JGyse.27689$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.
|
Ahem also. I did not intend to imply that there were only two US
manufacturers of fixed disc/disk drives.
I would never underestimate IBM's production of anything.
I recall being told (in the 1980s?) that IBM was the largest semiconductor
maker in the world, but that this fact never appeared in published
statistics. IBM didn't sell semiconductors - they went straight into blue
boxes of various sizes.
| Quote: | 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."
|
--
Peter Duncanson
UK
(posting from u.c.l.e) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Brian {Hamilton Kelly}
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2005 7:50 pm
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
On Sunday, in article <3hkobeFhfageU1@individual.net>
einde.ocallaghan@planet-interkom.de "Einde O'Callaghan"
wrote:
| Quote: | Brian {Hamilton Kelly} wrote:
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.
|
So are many other such words: however, Fowler believes that "the ultimate
source of the ending is the Greek -izo[1], whether the particular verb
was an actual Greek one, or a Latin or French or English imitation, and
whether the imitation was made by addint the termination to a Greek or
other stem".
| Quote: | 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.
|
Since all the verbs are sounded with /z/, it surely makes sense to spell
them that way too, except where we know (as with advertise) that -ize
would be wrong.
--
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 |
|
|
Robin Bignall
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 12:23 am
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:04:41 +0100, Peter Duncanson
<mail@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
| Quote: | On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 13:03:29 +0100, Robin Bignall <docrobin@ntlworld.com
wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 18:47:34 +0100, Peter Duncanson
mail@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
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.
Ahem also. I did not intend to imply that there were only two US
manufacturers of fixed disc/disk drives.
I would never underestimate IBM's production of anything.
I recall being told (in the 1980s?) that IBM was the largest semiconductor
maker in the world, but that this fact never appeared in published
statistics. IBM didn't sell semiconductors - they went straight into blue
boxes of various sizes.
That was true. But two developments, in the early 1980s, of products |
which could be sold in the millions rather than the tens of thousands
caused IBM to have to farm out some semi-conductor manufacture (to TI
for the token-ring LAN chipset), and both manufacture and development
(to Intel for the PC family).
--
Robin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Briggs
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 1:23 am
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
Robin Bignall wrote:
| Quote: | On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:04:41 +0100, Peter Duncanson
mail@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 13:03:29 +0100, Robin Bignall
docrobin@ntlworld.com> wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 18:47:34 +0100, Peter Duncanson
mail@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
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.
Ahem also. I did not intend to imply that there were only two US
manufacturers of fixed disc/disk drives.
I would never underestimate IBM's production of anything.
I recall being told (in the 1980s?) that IBM was the largest
semiconductor maker in the world, but that this fact never appeared
in published statistics. IBM didn't sell semiconductors - they went
straight into blue boxes of various sizes.
That was true. But two developments, in the early 1980s, of products
which could be sold in the millions rather than the tens of thousands
caused IBM to have to farm out some semi-conductor manufacture (to TI
for the token-ring LAN chipset), and both manufacture and development
(to Intel for the PC family).
|
Not exactly - they bought an existing microprocessor off the shelf for the
PC. (The Intel 8088, a derivative of the 8086, for the PC, and then the
80286 for the AT). They seem to have chosen that one because they already
had the rights to manufacture it...
--
John Briggs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
David Wilson Clarke
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:41 am
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
John Briggs wrote:
| Quote: | Robin Bignall wrote:
That was true. But two developments, in the early 1980s, of products
which could be sold in the millions rather than the tens of thousands
caused IBM to have to farm out some semi-conductor manufacture (to TI
for the token-ring LAN chipset), and both manufacture and development
(to Intel for the PC family).
Not exactly - they bought an existing microprocessor off the shelf for the
PC. (The Intel 8088, a derivative of the 8086, for the PC, and then the
80286 for the AT).
|
I think the 80186 was in there too, XT?
--
Dave Clarke |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Einde O'Callaghan
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 3:49 am
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
Brian {Hamilton Kelly} wrote:
<snip>
| Quote: |
Since all the verbs are sounded with /z/, it surely makes sense to spell
them that way too, except where we know (as with advertise) that -ize
would be wrong.
But we know that in modern British English the spelling with "-ise" is |
always correct even if we don't know whether "-ize" is correct - except
for "prize". This is the simpler rule I use with my pupils here in
Germany, who definitely don't know when "-ize' is appropriate -
especially since teh German equivalents are spelled with "s", e.g.
"spezialisieren". In German you couldn't use "z" here since the letter
is pronounced differently.
Regards, Einde O'Callaghan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Giles Todd
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 4:41 am
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:41:15 +0100, David Wilson Clarke
<pinggetridofthisbituino@operamail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | I think the 80186 was in there too, XT?
|
No. You could only make 'not quite compatibles' with the 80186.
IBM's PC, XT and AT BIOSes trampled on IRQ vectors described as 'Intel
reserved' in the documentation for the 8088/8086. These vectors were
later used by Intel in the 80188/80186 in order to manage the
integrated peripherals on those devices.
You could write *a* BIOS for the 80186 and you could hack MS-DOS to
run on a machine with such a BIOS. But the BIOS could not be IBM PC
compatible and nor could the hardware interface to software (no
hardware virtualization on PCs in them days). Any software which
drove the hardware directly (and a lot did then) would quickly notice
the difference and go off into never-never land. That's why MS Flight
Simulator used to be a popular PC-compatibility testing tool.
Giles |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
David Wilson Clarke
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 5:10 am
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
Giles Todd wrote:
| Quote: | On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:41:15 +0100, David Wilson Clarke
pinggetridofthisbituino@operamail.com> wrote:
I think the 80186 was in there too, XT?
No. You could only make 'not quite compatibles' with the 80186.
|
Ah, maybe that's what I remember, one of the 'compatables'.
| Quote: | IBM's PC, XT and AT BIOSes trampled on IRQ vectors described as 'Intel
reserved' in the documentation for the 8088/8086. These vectors were
later used by Intel in the 80188/80186 in order to manage the
integrated peripherals on those devices.
|
I remember thinking the whole interrupt setup for PCs was a bodge. I'd just
moved up from little 6809 systems, to 68000 on VME, which seemed so easy to
write FORTH/assembler on. Then I had to work on the PC/XT. Yuk.
--
Dave Clarke |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robin Bignall
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 5:28 am
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 19:23:07 GMT, "John Briggs"
<john.briggs4@ntlworld.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Robin Bignall wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:04:41 +0100, Peter Duncanson
mail@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 13:03:29 +0100, Robin Bignall
docrobin@ntlworld.com> wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 18:47:34 +0100, Peter Duncanson
mail@peterduncanson.net> wrote:
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.
Ahem also. I did not intend to imply that there were only two US
manufacturers of fixed disc/disk drives.
I would never underestimate IBM's production of anything.
I recall being told (in the 1980s?) that IBM was the largest
semiconductor maker in the world, but that this fact never appeared
in published statistics. IBM didn't sell semiconductors - they went
straight into blue boxes of various sizes.
That was true. But two developments, in the early 1980s, of products
which could be sold in the millions rather than the tens of thousands
caused IBM to have to farm out some semi-conductor manufacture (to TI
for the token-ring LAN chipset), and both manufacture and development
(to Intel for the PC family).
Not exactly - they bought an existing microprocessor off the shelf for the
PC. (The Intel 8088, a derivative of the 8086, for the PC, and then the
80286 for the AT). They seem to have chosen that one because they already
had the rights to manufacture it...
|
"Farmed out" was not exactly the right expression for the PC, I agree.
I got myself to several of the planning meetings that took place
around 1977/78, when the subject of designing some sort of
intelligence into a dumb display was discussed. Several
microprocessors were mentioned - I remember that many people were keen
on the Motorola 650X series because it was faster than the 8086 - but
I don't remember anyone seriously suggesting that IBM should try to
build the chips. Our previous foray into the personal computing
market - the 5100, which, with IBM chips and mainframe-quality
engineering, cost over 14,000 dollars in 1976 - was not exactly a
sales success. I doubt that we could have built a PC down to the
price of the 5150 other than by using off-the-shelf components.
Getting the contract for the 8088 made Intel's fortune. The IBM chip
plants were running at full capacity then, too, and that's why the
manufacture of the token ring was subcontracted.
--
Robin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul Burke
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 1:30 pm
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
| Quote: | But we know that in modern British English the spelling with "-ise" is
always correct even if we don't know whether "-ize" is correct - except
for "prize".
|
Is this another example of the peculiar facility in English for creating
distinctions between words, based on spelling differences which then
diverge in meaning? Is "prize" the same word as "price"?
Paul Burke |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
David
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 2:10 pm
Post subject: Re: intialise, criticise, realize .... |
|
|
In article <3hsj1jFfljb0U1@individual.net>, Paul Burke
<paul@scazon.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
But we know that in modern British English the spelling with "-ise"
is always correct even if we don't know whether "-ize" is correct
- except for "prize".
Is this another example of the peculiar facility in English for
creating distinctions between words, based on spelling differences
which then diverge in meaning? Is "prize" the same word as "price"?
|
One is, one isn't, and a third might be; "praise" is, though.
--
http://www.dacha.freeuk.com/aureole/50-ravens.htm
Upon the hill, within the stones, among the scattering of bones... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in