Justin B Rye <[email protected]> wrote: > MJ Ray wrote: > > Isn't that just a hangover of the first-used name? In general, > > Wikipedia is not a primary source and should not be cited itself. > > I'm not trying to find an authority to tell me what's correct. I'm > pointing at primary evidence of current usage. Wikipedia is a text > written by people who clearly know what a filesystem is and > consistently choose to write it as "file system" (and to make the > one-word version redirect to the two-word version). [...]
Wikipedia is written by an infinite number of monkeys, as well as some people who know what things are. Do we know the reason for the old-fashioned splitting? > I wonder if Apple base their documentation style guide on research > about what terms normal users are familiar with? [...] Again, we don't know Apple's reasons. > >> As with "web server", the problem is that technical specialists are > >> always the first to think of these terms as words in their own > >> right, while the general public still sees that as obscure and > >> intimidating. > > > > I'm not convinced by that: got data? > > As it happens, I also asked two nearby users; one of them said he > would expect "file system" and the other said "file-system", an > option I hadn't considered. An anecdote isn't data. I understand that the hyphenation of nouns is frequently a middle step on the road to becoming a single word, so that doesn't surprise me. > Or are you asking for evidence that unfamiliar jargon is seen as > obscure and intimidating? I'm asking for evidence that "filesystem" is seen by the general public as more obscure and intimidating than "file system". [...] > > So, all else being equal, adverbs after verbs! > > When two constructions are both grammatical, and may convey subtly > different senses, a taboo against one of the alternatives serves > only to restrict your expressive potential. Consider the following > two sentences: > - She answered the king's question foolishly. > - She foolishly answered the king's question. The second one is ambiguous. To have the sense of it being a foolish action, it could be written more clearly as "Foolishly, ...". But, as I wrote: "all else being equal". Different meanings is not all else being equal. Hope that explains, -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
