Securing Electricity Meter Cupboard

[rsgaz]

How many ignorami [sic] have to misuse a word

Skip to 1:45...

 

[JohnD]

ignorami

incorrect word.

Ignoramus is a verb, not a noun.

Edit
too slow

 

[EFLImpudence]

That obviously depends on what one means by "maintaining standards". You seem to think that everything should be done to prevent any further evolution of language.

Well, if you can't see what that means, then there is no point discussing it with you.

That is precisely my (and winston's) view about "transformer", but you and others seem to disagree. As I've said, if the components that had for decades been known as "transformers" no longer existed, then I would see no problem with now using the word to refer to something else (even if it has the same or similar functionality. However, those components do still exist.

No, that is the fault of the original definition including the method of manufacture rather than confining it to the purpose of the device.


Of course, using the same logic, when I point out that the definition of a car being "a road vehicle powered by an internal combustion engine" means that electric vehicles are therefore not "cars" that is different.

 

[333rocky333]

the present culture is determined by Joey Essex rather than Jacob Rees-Mogg.


This results in the language being determined by the ignorant.

Oy, We know joey essex but none of us have even heard of Jacob Wotsisname

We dont slag off "Nandos"

 

[JohnW2]

No, that is the fault of the original definition including the method of manufacture rather than confining it to the purpose of the device.

Are you saying that the original definition, that must have persisted for countless decades, was 'incorrect' and that the one now seemingly being used by many is 'correct'?

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

It is not incorrect. Did you not see my analogy with cars?

 

[JohnW2]

It is not incorrect. Did you not see my analogy with cars?

As far as I can see, the OED is again out on a limb. I can't find any other dictionary which restricts the definition of "car" to a vehicle with an internal combustion engine - all other definitions appear to be more generic than that. Which do you feel is 'correct' or 'incorrect'?

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnD]

I can't find any other dictionary which restricts the definition of "car" to a vehicle with an internal combustion engine

Have you looked in any 40-year-old dictionaries?

 

[EFLImpudence]

I thought the OED was the standard.

So why do you concentrate on a transformer having to be an old-fashioned lump containing a wire-wound iron core rather than any device which transforms voltage, restricted to a.c. or not?

From another thread:

What's another word for converter?

 

[JohnW2]

I thought the OED was the standard.

"The standard"? I thought we were being encouraged not to use it because ".... the OED seems to be the lexicographical equivalent of the OSG."?

So why do you concentrate on a transformer having to be an old-fashioned lump containing a wire-wound iron core rather than any device which transforms voltage, restricted to a.c. or not?

We've been over and over this ground more times than I care to remember. To save my typing fingers and time, I would suggest that you make use of the forum's Search facility!

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnD]

I'd say the OED is as near as we have to a "definitive" dictionary.

Remember that it is being constantly updated.

The hard-copy version is huge and takes up about four feet of a library shelf.

 

[EFLImpudence]

"The standard"? I thought we were being encouraged not to use it because ".... the OED seems to be the lexicographical equivalent of the OSG."?

I do think that, but you disagreed.

We've been over and over this ground more times than I care to remember. To save my typing fingers and time, I would suggest that you make use of the forum's Search facility!

Doing that will not persuade you of the error of your ways.


The definition of a fruit is that part of the plant which contains the seeds.
Are people who call things fruits, although they do not do this, wrong or should the definition be changed?

 

[DetlefSchmitz]

The USA have defined pizza as a vegetable, to allow school meals to meet there legal requirements. More extreme than fruit. But if you are powerful enough... They also (by influence) re-defined the British billion.

 

[JohnD]

The definition of a fruit is that part of the plant which contains the seeds.

No. A definition.

If you are in a meeting of greengrocers or chefs the understanding may not be the same as the understanding in a group of botanical taxonomists.

Is a tomato a vegetable? is a strawberry a berry? is a cauliflower a flower? Would you put a cucumber in a fruit salad?

 

[EFLImpudence]

No. A definition.

Where are the others?

If you are in a meeting of greengrocers or chefs the understanding may not be the same as the understanding in a group of botanical taxonomists.

So, one will be wrong. Understanding is not the criterion; that's the trouble here.
Some understand others who don't understand.
Does the definition say that part of the plant which contains the seeds or anything else a group of workers may say?

Is a tomato a vegetable? is a strawberry a berry? is a cauliflower a flower? Would you put a cucumber in a fruit salad?

No, no, no, you may if you want.