[ On Friday, September 15, 2000 at 11:49:43 (-0400), Rich Salz wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: What is Cederqvist?
>
> > Well this old timer really thinks it very very very bad form to refer to
> > something like this by the disembodied name of its creator
>
> What, you've never heard "according to Hoyle" or "as it says in
> Webster's"
> Lawyer's will also talk about "Black's" (law dictionary) and Chemists
> the "CRC", etc.
"according to Hoyle" != "according to The Hoyle"
"as it says in Webster's" != "as it says in The Webster's"
"Black's" != "The Black's"
Hoyle (as in Mr. Hoyle) did say the things one might refer to when one
says "according to Hoyle" (though that's a bit poor as an example, IIRC,
because it's also the title!). However "The Hoyle", whatever that is,
did not say those things.
I guess even "Webster's" is a bad example because that word is actually
part of the title too so in colloquial communications it is a
sufficiently specific contraction to be usable....
Yes it's a fine point, but it really really really gets on my nerves!
It's even more annoying than all the times seemingly otherwise literate
people use the non-word "definately" (Arrrgh!).
--
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Secrets of the Weird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
