emery@gypsy.UUCP (06/06/85)
Why is it that some things do not take the definite article? In particular, why do programs run on THE Vax but run on Unix? (no article???) We tried to come up with an explanation, but failed. I argued that maybe it's because software is some sort of collective noun, but this didn't seem to work either. Thanks Dave Emery ...princeton!siemens!emery
halle@hou2b.UUCP (J.HALLE) (06/07/85)
Why "the VAX" and not "the UNIX"? Because using UNIX as a noun is incorrect. The trademark UNIX is an adjective which must modify something: the UNIX operating system the UNIX kernal etc. So try using it properly if you want the article included.
ron@brl-tgr.ARPA (06/07/85)
> Why "the VAX" and not "the UNIX"? > Because using UNIX as a noun is incorrect. The trademark UNIX > is an adjective which must modify something: > the UNIX operating system > the UNIX kernal > etc. > So try using it properly if you want the article included. WRONG, VAX is a trademark, also. They should both be adjectives. The real reason is probably because a VAX is a single object where UNIX (as most operating systems) are more intangible things. runs under UNIX, written in Fortran, written in English, not written in the English (but, written in the book) -Ron
nather@utastro.UUCP (Ed Nather) (06/07/85)
> > > Why is it that some things do not take the definite article? > > In particular, why do programs run on THE Vax > but run on Unix? (no article???) > Unix is a proper noun (a name), Vax is a *kind* of computer, but not the name given to one. I run programs under THE Unix operating system, but under Unix, the same way I run under THE tree to get out of the rain, but run under Mabel if that is the tree's given name. -- Ed Nather Astronony Dept, U of Texas @ Austin {allegra,ihnp4}!{noao,ut-sally}!utastro!nather nather%utastro.UTEXAS@ut-sally.ARPA
abc@brl-sem.ARPA (06/07/85)
To add to what Ron said, for whatever reasons, computers seem to take the article, software in geneal does not. Thus a probram runs under (VMS, UNIX, RT-11, EXEC-8) on the (1180, VAX, ENIAC, TRS-80). The reason may have to do with the evolution of operating systems as software to support programing in languages. Now,that goes 'way back; se never wrote in The English, The Franch, etc. Brint
nrh@lzwi.UUCP (N.R.HASLOCK) (06/07/85)
VAX is a machine, UNIX is an operating system which can run on it. Note the equivalent use of the 3B vs VMS. Nigel Madly Mumbling English into the wilderness
zben@umd5.UUCP (06/08/85)
Why "the VAX" and not "the UNIX"? There is a problem of collectivization
and physical presence here. If your installation has only one VAX, it is
probable your people say "the VAX" to refer to that collection of boxes in
the corner. Since we have several here, more people refer to them as
"the department's machine", CINCOM (sin-comm), or use the network names
like umcp-cs or cvl. In any case, there is a physically locatable box
or collection of cabinets. Thus people say "the <object>".
By the way, you don't usually use the "the" when the object is NAMED.
You would say "the network manager", but not "the Bill Smith". In the same
way we would say "the department's 780" but not "the umcp-cs". We would
just say "umcp-cs".
Note also that to collectively refer to the many VAX computers out there
a lot of people use the coined term "VAXEN", probably a derivative of
"vixen" or something. There is probably some language that has contributed
to English that uses a suffix "en" to denote a ploural, and subconscious
memory supplies the usage. In any case, we say "on vaxen" rather than
"on THE vaxen".
On the other hand, UNIX is a pretty nebulous thing. You can't exactly
point to memory box 5 and say "the UNIX lives there". Consider an IBM
virtual system that might have 5 or 10 copies of UNIX running in separate
virtual machines...
You find this "the-less" usage with most software, since it is not locatable.
When I say "in SPSS you ..." I mean that on any computer running the SPSS
program you would "...". The usage is the same with UNIX. I mean any system
running the UNIX program.
--
Ben Cranston ...{seismo!umcp-cs,ihnp4!rlgvax}!cvl!umd5!zben zben@umd2.ARPAlambert@boring.UUCP (06/08/85)
> Why "the VAX" and not "the UNIX"? > Because using UNIX as a noun is incorrect. The trademark UNIX > is an adjective which must modify something: > the UNIX operating system > the UNIX kernal > etc. > So try using it properly if you want the article included. I don't buy this explanation. I have seen "UNIX" used as a noun hundreds of times. For example, in "man learn" we find: "learn - computer aided instruction about UNIX" "*Learn* gives Computer Aided Instruction courses and practice in the use of UNIX, the C Shell, and the Berkeley text editors." "The main strength of *learn*, that it asks the student to use the real UNIX, also makes possible baffling mistakes." If "UNIX" is replaced by an adjective, these sentences become ungrammatical. Many more examples can be found on other man pages. Just like we cannot say "the UNIX", we cannot (normally) say "a UNIX", whereas "a Vax" is quite normal. Although there are different types of Vaxen, in saying "a Vax" we do not indicate a type (like 11/780), but an instance (like "the Vax in the basement"). So, even though there are many UN*Xes now, in normal speech "UNIX" stands for the abstraction "the friendly operating system designed by hackers that changed the world" or something like that--never mind all the versions. *All* software names are used in the same way as names of cities, like "New York": one cannot say "the New York" (but one *can* say: "the real New York"). Even though this may not be an *explanation*, it seems at least to be the rule. -- Lambert Meertens ...!{seismo,okstate,garfield,decvax,philabs}!lambert@mcvax.UUCP CWI (Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science), Amsterdam
barryg@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Lee Gold) (06/09/85)
Unfortunately, answering that UNIX is an adjective doesn't solve the problem. In this language, it's perfectly proper to use adjectives as nouns. It's called metonymy (I think) in poetics, but my Linguistics prof just called it function shift to say stuff like "floating in the blue" or "Things are sunny" or "Black is beautiful." As you'll notice from the above example, SOME adjectives take "the" and some don't. Unfortuntely I only took a couple of classes in Linguistics. Maybe someone else can summarize which adjectives do/don't and why. --Lee Gold
keesan@bbnccv.UUCP (Morris M. Keesan) (06/11/85)
In article <561@umd5.UUCP> zben@umd5.UUCP (Ben Cranston) writes: >Note also that to collectively refer to the many VAX computers out there >a lot of people use the coined term "VAXEN", probably a derivative of >"vixen" or something. There is probably some language that has contributed >to English that uses a suffix "en" to denote a plural, and subconscious >memory supplies the usage. VAXen is probably more akin to "oxen" then "vixen", as far as derivation. The "en" suffix is a German pluralization, which has leaked over into English in words such as "oxen". -- Morris M. Keesan keesan@bbn-unix.ARPA {decvax,ihnp4,etc.}!bbncca!keesan
friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) (06/11/85)
In article <561@umd5.UUCP> zben@umd5.UUCP (Ben Cranston) writes: >Why "the VAX" and not "the UNIX"? There is a problem of collectivization >and physical presence here. > Finally, an explanation I can buy! >Note also that to collectively refer to the many VAX computers out there >a lot of people use the coined term "VAXEN", probably a derivative of >"vixen" or something. There is probably some language that has contributed >to English that uses a suffix "en" to denote a ploural, and subconscious >memory supplies the usage. In any case, we say "on vaxen" rather than >"on THE vaxen". > A small historical note here. The basis for this is words like ox/oxen and child/children. This is an old remnant, but it is original to Germanic languages and thus to English. That is in Old English(as well as modern German) there were(are) several classes of nouns with different pluralizations, one of which is the '-en' ending. In English the plural has been progressively regularized to a single form('-s'), with a *few* exceptions like ox and child, which are now considered "irregular" plurals. -- Sarima (Stanley Friesen) {trwrb|allegra|cbosgd|hplabs|ihnp4|aero!uscvax!akgua}!sdcrdcf!psivax!friesen or {ttdica|quad1|bellcore|scgvaxd}!psivax!friesen
allen@osu-eddie.UUCP (John Allen) (06/12/85)
> VAXen is probably more akin to "oxen" then "vixen", as far as derivation. > The "en" suffix is a German pluralization, which has leaked over into English > in words such as "oxen". > -- > Morris M. Keesan > keesan@bbn-unix.ARPA > {decvax,ihnp4,etc.}!bbncca!keesan The "en" suffix was inherited by both German and English from Proto-German. English used to have several noun declensions that had different endings for the plural. One of these had the ending "en". During the history of English, most of these declensions were lost except for a few forms that are now considered irregular including "oxen", "geese", "teeth". So this is not a German plural that has been adopted into English, it has been there since the beginning of English. John Allen Ohio State University (UUCP: cbosgd!osu-eddie!allen) (CSNet: allen@ohio-state)
jack@boring.UUCP (06/14/85)
A related question: Why am I 'in THE editor', but 'in vi'? Or 'using A DBMS' but 'using ingres'? It seems that program names have become more-or-less like personal names..... Also, note that the question isn't restricted to unix/vax: It's also 'multics', 'nos/be', 'vms', and 'the cyber', 'the pdp', etc. -- Jack Jansen, jack@mcvax.UUCP The shell is my oyster.
levy@ttrdc.UUCP (Daniel R. Levy) (06/16/85)
Based on the now-common abuse of the term 'Unix' as a noun, it seems plausible to use 'the Unix' in a construction like: "This program will run under the Unix modified at Berkeley but not under the Unix internally used at AT&T." Granted, it sounds a bit stilted, but the article 'the' is now justified, refer- ring as it does to a PARTICULAR item. But most (including AT&T :-)) would be happier with 'the Unix operating system' or similar phrase used in place of plain 'the Unix' in the example. D. Levy AT&T Teletype Corp. ^^^^ Skokie, Ill. Unix is a trademark of AT&T Bell Laboratories (and don't you forget it!).
rob@ptsfa.UUCP (Rob Bernardo) (06/16/85)
>Why "the VAX" and not "the UNIX"?
1. Generally "the" is not used with names in English (except for names
that descriptive, e.g. "the United States").
[The function of "the" along with a description is to make reference
to a specific object for which there is no available name.]
2. Names of authored works are a more complex situation.
This is because the name for the work in the abstract
is often used in making reference to a particular instance.
For example, "Hamlet" is the name of what Shakespeare authored
but I could say
The "Hamlet" I have is missing act 2; my dog got at it.
in reference to particular physical copy, or
The "Hamlet" I have is missing act 2; the publisher goofed."
in reference to particular printing or edition.
3. Similarly, "UNIX" is the name of an authored work and as a name without
a 'a' or 'the' refers to the software in the abstract. And if you were
to refer to a particular version or physical copy of UNIX you would
use "UNIX" with a 'a' or 'the', as in:
The UNIX we have is basically System V with some Berkeley enhancements.o
in reference to a particular version, or
The UNIX we have is corrupt. We will have to restore the filesystem from a backup tape.
in reference to a particular physical copy.
4. Names of makes of products are only somewhat similar to names of authored
works. They are similar insofar as when they are used to refer to a particular
physical instance, you use 'a' or 'the'. But they are dissimilar insofar as
the article is preserved even when referring to the product in general.
I do not have time to present examples wiht "VAX". The system is coming
down is a few seconds.
--
Rob Bernardo, San Ramon, California
ihnp4!ptsfa!rob
{nsc,ucbvax,decwrl,amd,fortune,zehntel}!dual!ptsfa!robmuffy@lll-crg.ARPA (Muffy Barkocy) (06/17/85)
In article <2061@sdcrdcf.UUCP> barryg@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Lee Gold) writes: >Unfortunately, answering that UNIX is an adjective doesn't solve the problem. >In this language, it's perfectly proper to use adjectives as nouns. It's >called metonymy (I think) in poetics, but my Linguistics prof just called >it function shift to say stuff like "floating in the blue" or "Things are >sunny" or "Black is beautiful." > >As you'll notice from the above example, SOME adjectives take "the" and >some don't. Unfortuntely I only took a couple of classes in Linguistics. >Maybe someone else can summarize which adjectives do/don't and why. > >--Lee Gold With the examples you've given, nothing is proven. "Things are sunny" has the adjective "sunny" modifying the noun "things," "sunny" does *not* become a noun. I believe I was told that it is called a "predicate adjective." In the example "floating in the blue," I would assume that this is a truncation of "floating in the blue sea," ust as "out of the blue" is actually "out of the blue sky (out of nowhere)." I would agree with previous posters, that it is "UNIX" rather than "the UNIX" because of intangibility. Just as we say "he has integrity" rather than "he has the integrity." Muffy
jeff@mit-eddie.UUCP (Jeff Mattson) (06/17/85)
> I would agree with previous posters, that it is "UNIX" rather than "the > UNIX" because of intangibility. Just as we say "he has integrity" rather > than "he has the integrity." But we would say, "He has the integrity in the family." This sentence seems to suppose that integrity is a tangible quantity and there's only so much in one family.-- ---------------------------------------- Don't dream it; BE IT! ---------------------------------------- Jeff Mattson Jeff@MIT-Eddie 497-3980 (work) 424-7226 (home) 24 Westland Ave. #10 Boston, MA 02115
mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) (06/22/85)
>Note also that to collectively refer to the many VAX computers out there >a lot of people use the coined term "VAXEN", probably a derivative of >"vixen" or something. There is probably some language that has contributed >to English that uses a suffix "en" to denote a ploural, and subconscious >memory supplies the usage. In any case, we say "on vaxen" rather than >"on THE vaxen". In the early days of the Vax, the plural was "Vaxes". The first time I heard "Vaxen", it was used as a deliberate joke, but it sounded OK, and after a while most people (including me) began to use it without the joking overtone. In the not so distant past, lots of English words took "n" or "en" in the plural (shoe -> shoon, for example). German normally does so. -- Martin Taylor {allegra,linus,ihnp4,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt {uw-beaver,qucis,watmath}!utcsri!dciem!mmt