Though the term kilo is not accepted by the standards group as a word in itself, my dictionary says "kilo: Noun. A kilogram." Most people view correct word usage to be as defined by dictionaries and thus have the view of journalists and not standards bodies. Therefore if the majority believe that the kilo is a valid unit (and our media makes frequent use of it) then people will use it as such. It is always extremely hard to force standards of spelling and word usage on people, if it were easy we would still be speaking English the same as it was spoken 300 years ago, or even 500 years ago. Further there would be no differences between the English of the UK, USA, Canada, Australia, and other countries.
While it is important for us to to try to enforce standards regarding SI usage, we will never by 100% successful because the manner of usage will always evolve. This is especially so in cultures where the majority rules. For example, someone mentioned previously that spelling and word usage is defined by how it is used by the majority of the population. Further there are always lazy people and when a group of people uses a unit frequently, they often eventually shorten the name of the unit. For example, look what happened to the word kilocalorie. In food usage it simply became Calorie because the orginal calorie unit was too small for use in food exothermic reactions and people got tires of saying "kilo" in front of the word "calorie". Now Calorie is often spelled calorie. The SI board eventually gave up using the kilocalorie and calorie as approved terms. The masses have a lot of power and are hard to control. The same will likely happen to other SI units. Language always changes because it is dictated by the masses and not a standards body or even a government (especially when in many countries the government is put into power by the masses) can not enforce usage with perfect effectiveness, they can only slow the evolution of the usage. The above is a reply to Bill Potts ------------------------------------------------------------ There's nothing wrong with "half a kilogram." However, as "half a kilo" doesn't contain a unit of measure, there's quite a bit wrong with it (at least for those of us who are trying to lead by example). (Of course, for those in the drug subculture, it's an everyday term. <g>) Bill Potts, CMS Roseville, CA http://metric1.org [SI Navigator] >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Behalf Of John Nichols >Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 17:09 >To: U.S. Metric Association >Subject: [USMA:29276] Well > > >Things do not change much. > >What is wrong with half a kilo. > > > >John Nichols BE, Ph.D. (Newcastle), MIE (Aust), Chartered Professional >Engineer >Assistant Professor >Texas A&M University, Department of Construction Science >Langford AC Rm: A414 MD 3137, College Station, TX 77843-3137 > >Aut viam inveniam aut faciam. > >Electronic mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Telephone: 979 845 6541 >Facsimile: 979 862 1572 >Web site >: >http://archone.tamu.edu/architecture/faculty/nichols/mainframe.html > > >
