Me too.
Fair enough - but does that mean that you didn't intend to write quite what you did?Me too.
Well, as you will know from what I wrote previously, I very much sympathise with that approach. However, what you wrote was:I was trying to use terminology the OP would understand, instead of the correct terminology, as should have been clear from my earlier post.
If the G9 capsules are not enclosed, then I disagree that they are good quality.
I think I must have misunderstood, because you appeared to be saying that you would disagree that the capsules were good quality if they were not enclosed in a luminaire!I meant enclosed by the luminaire.
Yes, I think you did.I think I must have misunderstood
So he did - and I (and BAS) have no excuse for not remembering that, because it was that very 'total confusion' in this thread which I blamed on the new-fangled usage of the word "lamp"!The OP used the old term 'lamps' to mean the luminaires, which he said were good quality. ...
I agree, which is why I didn't use it in my first comment.Very few members of the general public would use the word "luminaire"
If you agree that a headlight contains a lamp then table/standard lamp cannot be a correct term even if that's what people call them.Perhaps, now - but, as above, in most cases only because someone decided to change the language. I will agree that "headlight" and "headlamp" always seem to have been interchangeable - but your are old enough to know that "table lamp" (and many other types of "lamp") and "lamp post" originally meant.
I'm not sure."Change back", you mean?
I don't but I cannot do anything about those which occurred a long time ago.If so, I agree - but it is unusual to find you supporting a change in meaning/use of words!
They do - but they also do it for any lamp whether bulbous or not - so that's not a good reason, is it?Having said that, virtually every 'ordinary' person I know still talks of "bulbs",
They could call them lamps. Is that going back or a totally new experience.so nothing needs to be "changed back" for them!
I think BAS's point was that the 'quality' of a G9 capsule is a characteristic of that capsule, and is not affected by whatever fitting it is put into.
Indeed it was.I'm sure it was.
If the G9 capsules are not enclosed, then I disagree that they are good quality.
Remembering anything is not required.So he did - and I (and BAS) have no excuse for not remembering that
Having made the same 'mistake' myself (and confessing, not wriggling!), whilst you are probably right about the grammar of stillp's statement if it were taken out of context, the reality is that it is very clear (once one realises!) that it was the fitting/luminaire/whatever which was being said to be of "good quality" in the post to which he was responding - so, in contect, his "they" could not sensibly refer to the capsules.... there is no way that the "they" in "I disagree that they are good quality" can not have been referring to the G9 capsules.
As I conceded, headlamp/headlight seems out on a limb, since both words seems to have been in use 'for ever'If you agree that a headlight contains a lamp then table/standard lamp cannot be a correct term even if that's what people call them.
Of course they are. I'm sure that I could go out and buy any number of table lamps and standard lamps which were sold without a bulb in them.After all, if you take out the lamp part, then they are not table/standard lamps ...
I'm not so sure about this "long time ago". I think this attempt to rename 'light bulbs' is relatively new (maybe 20-30 years?).I don't [usually support of change in meaning/use of words] but I cannot do anything about those which occurred a long time ago.
But they always have, haven't they? Plenty of the 'light bulbs' around in my youth were far from being bulbous, but no-one dreamed (or is it dreamt?!) of calling them anything other than light bulbs. There are many examples of words which we have carried on using despite the fact that he historical derivation of them has become 'incorrect' in terms of the modern manifestation of the item.They do - but they also do it for any lamp whether bulbous or not ...
I didn't mean just remove the 'bulb'.Of course they are. I'm sure that I could go out and buy any number of table lamps and standard lamps which were sold without a bulb in them.
I don't think it is that important.If it were really felt sufficiently important to change "light bulb" to something else, then they should surely have come up with some new word, not substituting a word that already existed and meant (and continued to mean) something else? In any event, as I've said, the general population seem to be largely ignoring this ' change', so I'm not sure what it is meant to have achieved!
In that case, I don't understand what you did mean.I didn't mean just remove the 'bulb'.
In terms of the point I was making, I think it is very important. I was talking about the confusion, at least in some people's minds, that arose in this thread, because the OP used the 'original' (electrical) meaning of "lamp" (and bulb) - and that has nothing to do with the reason why the word (light) "bulb" arose decades earlier.I don't think it is that important. .... It was you complaining about the confusion. I was trying to explain a reason why it may have happened - from oil lamp.
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local