I agree with you, Stan. Actually, it is difficult to get much of the world, let alone the U.S., to use the correct SI symbols, let along some kind of standardized spelling, for unit names. For me, it is the use of the established symbols that must remain the same in all languages. I'm not tooting my own horn, but merely stating fact, that the pharmaceutical industry seems to be the most consistent user of correct SI symbolism on its product labels. It's afte the drug leaves the stock packaging that things go down hill.
I shall not hold it against my fellow citizens of they write meter instead of metre. This spelling convention never made it into U.S. English. It is reflected in the spelling of other words, such as center vs. centre, or theater vs. theatre. There are other spellings that became part of U.S. usage, such as -or (U.S.) vs. -our (other countries) (colour, flavour, valour). In some words of science, we have sulfate vs. sulphate, and diarrhea vs. diarrhoea. I do use, and support, the pronunciation of KILL-oh-mee-ter because it is a logical extension of the pronunciation of unit names with SI prefixes. But, that's just I. As for me, I am done posting anything about this again,. It is a little known codicil in the mission of USMA that we exist to Unite the efforts of all individuals and organizations interested in promoting the metric system. Let's drop all the trivia, stand together for world metrication, and keep our eyes on that prize! (A mole into a Himalaya is right!) Paul Paul Trusten, R.Ph. , Vice President U.S. Metric Association, Inc. www.metric.org trus...@grandecom.net +1(432)528-8824 ----- Original Message ----- From: Stanislav Jakuba To: si...@listserv.ieee.org Sent: 29 January, 2011 08:38 Subject: [SI] A mole hill into Himalaya I cannot but show my discomfiture at the enduring importance given to this –er –re non-issue. Americans must be the laughing stock of anyone who speaks other languages. None have this “problem.” European languages, except English, are (more or less) phonetic, and many other languages do not bather writing vowels in the first place, let along the silent ones like the irritating “e.” This debate is an American specialty as other English speaking countries including such as India use –re or do not care. Slavic languages, for example, have 6 or 7 ways to spell the name. This smear on American reputation as a get-things-done-country could be ignored if it was not one of the reasons for the failure of the Metric Board to get the changeover going back in the 1970s. That mole hill issue on the Himalayan scale of metricating a country should have been treated as follows: “Mr. Chairman, I would like us to decide the issue of spelling …” A reply: “Mr. Irritant, you or anyone else can spell it anyway you want. Let’s move to the next item on the agenda - a review of the report on structural steel sizes and deadlines the steal industry propose.” (A subcommittee reports.) Etc. It is a reflection on the poor quality of the Board members that they would let themselves be occupied by such a triviality. It is also a reflection on this Forum, that there are people on it still insisting on spelling one way or another knowing well what harm treating that issue as Y/N caused. As if there were no other words in the American English that can be spelled more than one way. Stan Jakuba
