 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Languages Forum » Ugly word... |
|
Page 1 of 4 Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| DKleinecke... |
 Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 3:20 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Where did the ugly word "maths" come from? And exactly who uses it?
As a speaker of USA English and a card-carrying mathematician I flinch
every time I see "maths". So far as I know, the much handsomer word
"math", as it is said in the USA, means exactly the same thing.
Is there any chance that "maths" will go away? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| benlizro at (no spam) ihug.co.nz... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:19 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 2, 12:20 pm, DKleinecke <dkleine... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]Where did the ugly word "maths" come from? And exactly who uses it?
As a speaker of USA English and a card-carrying mathematician I flinch
every time I see "maths". So far as I know, the much handsomer word
"math", as it is said in the USA, means exactly the same thing.
Is there any chance that "maths" will go away?
[/quote]
Mercy! I thought it was just PTD who was affronted by the idea that
people outside the USA should persist in speaking English their own
way. Now we have another one...
Where it came from is so obvious that I won't play into your hands by
explaining it. Who uses it is, I believe, most people in the UK,
Australia & New Zealand.
As a former math major brought up saying "math", but now living in
"maths" country, I admit it is not natural to me. I'll even admit that
its final consonantism is a little more complicated than that of
"math". About as complicated as "paths" or "baths", to be precise. But
"ugly"? Chill out, bro.
And I'd advise you to get used to it rather than wait for it to "go
away".
Or is this PTD Parody Week and nobody told me?
Ross Clark |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 7:12 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 1, 11:19 pm, "benli... at (no spam) ihug.co.nz" <benli... at (no spam) ihug.co.nz> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 2, 12:20 pm, DKleinecke <dkleine... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Where did the ugly word "maths" come from? And exactly who uses it?
As a speaker of USA English and a card-carrying mathematician I flinch
every time I see "maths". So far as I know, the much handsomer word
"math", as it is said in the USA, means exactly the same thing.
Is there any chance that "maths" will go away?
Mercy! I thought it was just PTD who was affronted by the idea that
people outside the USA should persist in speaking English their own
way. Now we have another one...
Where it came from is so obvious that I won't play into your hands by
explaining it. Who uses it is, I believe, most people in the UK,
Australia & New Zealand.
As a former math major brought up saying "math", but now living in
"maths" country, I admit it is not natural to me. I'll even admit that
its final consonantism is a little more complicated than that of
"math". About as complicated as "paths" or "baths", to be precise. But
"ugly"? Chill out, bro.
And I'd advise you to get used to it rather than wait for it to "go
away".
Or is this PTD Parody Week and nobody told me?
[/quote]
There's a slight difference from "paths" and "baths." The -s isn't a
plural morpheme. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| alan... |
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 1:59 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote in message
news:3a1c4e0f-13bb-4fb2-a138-edbaf9acf177 at (no spam) v19g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 1, 11:19 pm, "benli... at (no spam) ihug.co.nz" <benli... at (no spam) ihug.co.nz> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 2, 12:20 pm, DKleinecke <dkleine... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Where did the ugly word "maths" come from? And exactly who uses it?
As a speaker of USA English and a card-carrying mathematician I flinch
every time I see "maths". So far as I know, the much handsomer word
"math", as it is said in the USA, means exactly the same thing.
Is there any chance that "maths" will go away?
Mercy! I thought it was just PTD who was affronted by the idea that
people outside the USA should persist in speaking English their own
way. Now we have another one...
Where it came from is so obvious that I won't play into your hands by
explaining it. Who uses it is, I believe, most people in the UK,
Australia & New Zealand.
As a former math major brought up saying "math", but now living in
"maths" country, I admit it is not natural to me. I'll even admit that
its final consonantism is a little more complicated than that of
"math". About as complicated as "paths" or "baths", to be precise. But
"ugly"? Chill out, bro.
And I'd advise you to get used to it rather than wait for it to "go
away".
Or is this PTD Parody Week and nobody told me?
[/quote]
||There's a slight difference from "paths" and "baths." The -s isn't a
||plural morpheme.
The "final consonantism", however, is the same. BTW, if the -s in maths is
not a plural morpheme, what is it? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 2:19 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 2, 1:59 am, "alan" <in_flagra... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
[quote]"Peter T. Daniels" <gramma... at (no spam) verizon.net> wrote in messagenews:3a1c4e0f-13bb-4fb2-a138-edbaf9acf177 at (no spam) v19g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 1, 11:19 pm, "benli... at (no spam) ihug.co.nz" <benli... at (no spam) ihug.co.nz> wrote:
On Nov 2, 12:20 pm, DKleinecke <dkleine... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Where did the ugly word "maths" come from? And exactly who uses it?
As a speaker of USA English and a card-carrying mathematician I flinch
every time I see "maths". So far as I know, the much handsomer word
"math", as it is said in the USA, means exactly the same thing.
Is there any chance that "maths" will go away?
Mercy! I thought it was just PTD who was affronted by the idea that
people outside the USA should persist in speaking English their own
way. Now we have another one...
Where it came from is so obvious that I won't play into your hands by
explaining it. Who uses it is, I believe, most people in the UK,
Australia & New Zealand.
As a former math major brought up saying "math", but now living in
"maths" country, I admit it is not natural to me. I'll even admit that
its final consonantism is a little more complicated than that of
"math". About as complicated as "paths" or "baths", to be precise. But
"ugly"? Chill out, bro.
And I'd advise you to get used to it rather than wait for it to "go
away".
Or is this PTD Parody Week and nobody told me?
||There's a slight difference from "paths" and "baths." The -s isn't a
||plural morpheme.
The "final consonantism", however, is the same. BTW, if the -s in maths is
not a plural morpheme, what is it?-
[/quote]
I don't use the word, but I haven't encountered it with plural
concord, so I suppose it's a reminiscence of the last letter or sound
of the word it's a contraction of. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 2:20 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 2, 2:33 am, LEE Sau Dan <dan... at (no spam) informatik.uni-freiburg.de>
wrote:
[quote]"alan" == alan <in_flagra... at (no spam) hotmail.com> writes:
alan> The "final consonantism", however, is the same. BTW, if the
alan> -s in maths is not a plural morpheme, what is it?
What is the "-s" in the following words, then?
"linguistics", "phonetics", "informatics", "economics", "physics",
"optics", "mechanics", "hydraulics", "dynamics".
[/quote]
And none of the above is abbreviated/contracted to its first syllable
plus its final -s! ("Econ" is the only one that's regularly
abbreviated, and it doesn't become "econs," does it?) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 2:22 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 2, 3:49 am, "alan" <in_flagra... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 1, 11:33 pm, LEE Sau Dan <dan... at (no spam) informatik.uni-freiburg.de> wrote:
"alan" == alan <in_flagra... at (no spam) hotmail.com> writes:
alan> The "final consonantism", however, is the same. BTW, if the
alan> -s in maths is not a plural morpheme, what is it?
What is the "-s" in the following words, then?
"linguistics", "phonetics", "informatics", "economics", "physics",
"optics", "mechanics", "hydraulics", "dynamics".
I would have called them plural. While the online Merriam Webster seems to
think so as well, defining their function as "noun plural but singular in
construction" (in which case the -s *would* be a plural morpheme), the
online Cambridge prefers to think of them as "noun [U] " ("[U]" designating
" Uncountable or singular noun: a noun that has no plural" (in which case
the -s would *not* be a plural morpheme; I have, however, no idea what kind
of a morpheme that -s would be).
Since Peter doesn't consider it pluralizing, perhaps he could explain what
kind of a morpheme he'd call it . . .
[/quote]
It's what my mentor the late Assyriologist Erica Reiner would call a
"miscut." The morpheme isn't {s} but {ics}. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 2:23 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 2, 6:07 am, LEE Sau Dan <dan... at (no spam) informatik.uni-freiburg.de>
wrote:
[quote]"alan" == alan <in_flagra... at (no spam) hotmail.com> writes:
>> "linguistics", "phonetics", "informatics", "economics",
>> "physics", "optics", "mechanics", "hydraulics", "dynamics".
alan> I would have called them plural. While the online Merriam
alan> Webster seems to think so as well, defining their function as
alan> "noun plural but singular in construction" (in which case the
alan> -s *would* be a plural morpheme), the online Cambridge prefers
alan> to think of them as "noun [U] " ("[U]" designating "
alan> Uncountable or singular noun: a noun that has no plural" (in
alan> which case the -s would *not* be a plural morpheme; I have,
alan> however, no idea what kind of a morpheme that -s would be).
I myself consider the above nouns singular. They just happen to have a
final "s". Like "lens".
[/quote]
Which has a final /z/. Cf. "tense." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| LEE Sau Dan... |
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 2:33 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
[quote]"alan" == alan <in_flagrante at (no spam) hotmail.com> writes:
[/quote]
alan> The "final consonantism", however, is the same. BTW, if the
alan> -s in maths is not a plural morpheme, what is it?
What is the "-s" in the following words, then?
"linguistics", "phonetics", "informatics", "economics", "physics",
"optics", "mechanics", "hydraulics", "dynamics".
--
Lee Sau Dan §õ¦u´° ~{ at (no spam) nJX6X~}
E-mail: danlee at (no spam) informatik.uni-freiburg.de
Home page: http://www.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/~danlee |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Ruud Harmsen... |
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:22 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:33:15 +0800: LEE Sau Dan
<danlee at (no spam) informatik.uni-freiburg.de>: in sci.lang:
[quote]"alan" == alan <in_flagrante at (no spam) hotmail.com> writes:
alan> The "final consonantism", however, is the same. BTW, if the
alan> -s in maths is not a plural morpheme, what is it?
What is the "-s" in the following words, then?
"linguistics", "phonetics", "informatics", "economics", "physics",
"optics", "mechanics", "hydraulics", "dynamics".
[/quote]
It may be interesting to look at the Dutch equivalents. Endings vary,
but none of them has a final s:
Linguïstiek, fonetiek, informatica, economie, fysica, optiek/optica,
mechanica, hydrauliek/hydraulica, dynamica.
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| alan... |
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:49 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 1, 11:33 pm, LEE Sau Dan <dan... at (no spam) informatik.uni-freiburg.de> wrote:
[quote]"alan" == alan <in_flagra... at (no spam) hotmail.com> writes:
alan> The "final consonantism", however, is the same. BTW, if the
alan> -s in maths is not a plural morpheme, what is it?
What is the "-s" in the following words, then?
"linguistics", "phonetics", "informatics", "economics", "physics",
"optics", "mechanics", "hydraulics", "dynamics".
[/quote]
I would have called them plural. While the online Merriam Webster seems to
think so as well, defining their function as "noun plural but singular in
construction" (in which case the -s *would* be a plural morpheme), the
online Cambridge prefers to think of them as "noun [U] " ("[U]" designating
" Uncountable or singular noun: a noun that has no plural" (in which case
the -s would *not* be a plural morpheme; I have, however, no idea what kind
of a morpheme that -s would be).
Since Peter doesn't consider it pluralizing, perhaps he could explain what
kind of a morpheme he'd call it . . . |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Peter T. Daniels... |
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:12 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 2, 10:06 am, Harlan Messinger
<hmessinger.removet... at (no spam) comcast.net> wrote:
[quote]LEE Sau Dan wrote:
"Harlan" == Harlan Messinger <hmessinger.removet... at (no spam) comcast.net> writes:
Harlan> whereas the French names of some other fields of study are
Harlan> "l'économique", "la linguistique", "l'informatique", and "la
Harlan> physique", the French equivalent of "mathematics" is "les
Harlan> mathématiques".
Maybe, "les mathématiques" used to be considered a collection, a
collection of the branches of geometry, algebra, etc.?
Interesting conjecture. Along the lines of "the sciences" and "the
humanities", then.
[/quote]
Is there reason to suppose a count noun "a mathematic"? Such that
geometry, algebra, etc., would be different mathematics, rather than
branches of mathematick?
Dr Johnson famously has "physick" alongside "musick." (One of
Webster's successes was the dismissal of those intrusive k's once and
for all.) But when was the science of physics named? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Panu... |
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:20 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 2, 6:19 am, "benli... at (no spam) ihug.co.nz" <benli... at (no spam) ihug.co.nz> wrote:
[quote]
Or is this PTD Parody Week and nobody told me?
[/quote]
No, it's the PTD Appreciation Month. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| LEE Sau Dan... |
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 6:07 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
[quote]"alan" == alan <in_flagrante at (no spam) hotmail.com> writes:
"linguistics", "phonetics", "informatics", "economics",
"physics", "optics", "mechanics", "hydraulics", "dynamics".
[/quote]
alan> I would have called them plural. While the online Merriam
alan> Webster seems to think so as well, defining their function as
alan> "noun plural but singular in construction" (in which case the
alan> -s *would* be a plural morpheme), the online Cambridge prefers
alan> to think of them as "noun [U] " ("[U]" designating "
alan> Uncountable or singular noun: a noun that has no plural" (in
alan> which case the -s would *not* be a plural morpheme; I have,
alan> however, no idea what kind of a morpheme that -s would be).
I myself consider the above nouns singular. They just happen to have a
final "s". Like "lens".
--
Lee Sau Dan §õ¦u´° ~{ at (no spam) nJX6X~}
E-mail: danlee at (no spam) informatik.uni-freiburg.de
Home page: http://www.informatik.uni-freiburg.de/~danlee |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| John Atkinson... |
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 6:15 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Ruud Harmsen wrote:
[quote]LEE Sau Dan <danlee at (no spam) informatik.uni-freiburg.de>: in sci.lang:
"alan" == alan <in_flagrante at (no spam) hotmail.com> writes:
alan> The "final consonantism", however, is the same. BTW, if the
alan> -s in maths is not a plural morpheme, what is it?
What is the "-s" in the following words, then?
"linguistics", "phonetics", "informatics", "economics", "physics",
"optics", "mechanics", "hydraulics", "dynamics".
Linguistics is interesting, isn't it?
It may be interesting to look at the Dutch equivalents. Endings vary,
but none of them has a final s:
Linguïstiek, fonetiek, informatica, economie, fysica, optiek/optica,
mechanica, hydrauliek/hydraulica, dynamica.
Aren't those final "-a"s originally plurals too though -- Latin neuter[/quote]
plurals?
The rest seem to be simply respelled loans from French. Except for
"economie" which appears to be from the French for "economy' -- the
French for "economics" is "économique". Since the French got all these
from Latin too, it seems that they got changed from plural to singular
in the process (since Latin "-a" standardly > French "-e" mute in loans).
John. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sun Dec 06, 2009 4:07 pm
|
|