On Jan 13, 2006, at 10:01 PM, Dan Barker wrote:
I agree "K" is more succinct, but dahdidididaddidah sounds great!
Maybe I'll
switch to just K, and maybe I won't.
Well, hey, didahdidahdidahdit dahdidaddidah sounds great too! Why
don't you use that. In fact, usually in my cw qso's I simply send a
lot of neat sounding combinations of dit's and dah's. The meaning is
really irrelevant as long as it sounds great.
In all seriousness, however, has anyone ever heard someone try to
break into a going qso by simply sending K? Clearly BK has meaning
separate from K, but not when turning the exchange over to the other
operator. Then the added B is redundant. I would suggest the
following logic, however, behind those who like to use BK in some
circumstances. Many operators, for some reason, feel compelled to
send full calls both at the beginning and end of their round (every
round): you know, W1EUY de K8xxx. Sometimes they even send it twice,
even after the qso is underway: W1EUY W1EUY de K8xxx K8xxx. I guess
they think you may not be sure what your call is or that you may have
forgotten that the qso was underway. In any event, if these
operators want to do a "quick break", they may feel naked without
giving the calls, and so fear the simple K will not be understood.
The BK in this case is more substantive and makes the intent clearer;
but it is still unnecessary.
The BK can also be of use when you ask a question. Sometimes an
operator asks a question and continues the conversation, clearly
expecting the answer to be given when qso is eventually passed over
to the other operator. Sometimes, however, one asks a question and
wants an immediate answer. The BK in this instance provides better
preparation than a simple K for the receiving station to recognize
the intent.
It is in this sense that code is a language and not simply an
alphabet used to spell another language. Indeed, there are a number
of cw languages: German, Dutch, Italian, French, etc. But, within
each of these, there are aspects of the code that take on idiomatic
meaning through usage that are thoroughly understood by those who
speak the language, but have no counterparts in regular speech.
These elements of the code play an informational role similar to
those conveyed by inflections of the voice. They grow up naturally
through usage in a context and are readily conveyed and mimicked and
repeated by those who hear. Cw, then, is a language that grows on
top of another language.
best wishes,
dave belsley, w1euy
_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
