Bill: I have no problem with keeping all the old expressions and metaphors - see my article in the UKMA Metric News (http://www.metricviews.org.uk/). Scroll down to 'User Friendly' Metric, where I echo pretty well much the same as you've written here.
However, I do believe that there is a difference between that, and using imperial expressions to PROMOTE (as opposed to live alongside) metrication - it just seems a bit incongruous. I did get an email from the site's owner, Michal Planicka, who did agree with that sentiment, while also admitting the use of 'inch by inch' was a bit tongue-in-cheek, while being a bit provocative and 'cool'. He said that he would be happy to consider a new tagline, and invited anyone to suggest one that is both 'provocative and legal', so I guess we can feel free to exercise our imaginations! Cheers John F-L ----- Original Message ----- From: Bill Potts To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 9:30 PM Subject: [USMA:44234] RE: Reasoable Language (was Metrication US) Pat and John: For years, some of us on this list have tried to be reassuring to the metrication-averse and to also counter some of the stranger statements made by the more virulent opponents of metrication. Simply stated, old units of measure used in expressions like "seven-league boots" and "Give him an inch and he'll take a mile" should not be a problem. There's no point in draining the color out of some great figures of speech, famous quotations, aphorisms, and the like, just for the sake of what is, to be really honest, just pedantry. Thus, "inching along" is something I find very acceptable. I really don't want to turn centimeter into a verb. Anti-metric scaremongers will, of course, claim that we're going to have to say things like "centimetering along" or even "two-point-five-four-centimetering along." We know better and need to let others know that changing the language, along with all the great idioms, is not the purpose of metrication. Lowly inchworms are not about to become lowly "two-and-a-half-centimeter worms." (Those with children may recognize my reference to The Lowly Worm, from Richard Scarry's book, What do people do all day?) The other scare tactic is to make ridiculously precise conversions of popular approximations. One is the case of two hypothetical cities that are about 80 miles apart. The scaremongers will say that, rather than telling someone that the remote city is 80 miles away, we're going to have to say it's "128.74752 kilometers away" or that a signpost bearing the distance, "80 miles" will have to be changed to "128.74752 km." Then there's the issue of swimming pool depth markers. The scaremongers (who, apparently, are unable to think outside the box), will say that changing the 3' marker to 91.5 cm is silly. They're right, of course, it would be silly if anyone were stupid enough to actually propose that. What one does, in fact, is either change it to 1 m or, to avoid any liability issues, move slightly closer to the deep end and put a 1 m sign where the depth really is 1 meter. Having said all that, though, I don't really have a problem with "centimeter by centimeter" or "one centimeter at a time." For myself, I tend to use unit-independent terms, such as "in small increments" or "a little bit at a time." Finally, I do think the use of "inch by inch" on the USMA Web site is somewhat tongue-in-cheek. It could also be interpreted as making the point that, until we achieve full metrication, we're stuck with the presence (or even omnipresence) of the inch. Now I must rush away to stop one of my more zealous pro-metric friends from changing the title of Robert Southey's famous poem to "Centimetercape Rock." Bill ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bill Potts WFP Consulting Roseville, CA http://metric1.org [SI Navigator] Dear John, They could try nanometre by nanometre. This seems to be close to the apparent speed. Cheers, Pat Naughtin PO Box 305 Belmont 3216, Geelong, Australia Phone: 61 3 5241 2008 Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or selling for their businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial and government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA. Pat's clients include the Australian Government, Google, NASA, NIST, and the metric associations of Canada, the UK, and the USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com for more metrication information, contact Pat at [email protected] or to get the free 'Metrication matters' newsletter go to: http://www.metricationmatters.com/newsletter to subscribe. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Pat Naughtin Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 11:56 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:44232] Re: Metrication US On 2009/03/30, at 5:44 PM, John Frewen-Lord wrote: Who is responsible for the Metrication US website? Is it officially related to the USMA? All our emails appear on it. Its tag line is '...slowly getting there, inch by inch'. I think this needs changing! 1. While (sadly) we may be slowly getting there, we don't need to make it an attribute! It should be something more positive. 2. Inch by inch? This is a METRIC website!! Whether the inch by inch was meant to be tongue in cheek, I don't know, but a lot of people will take that literally (especially the Stephen Humphreys of this world). This tag line needs to be changed! John F-L
