pds (02/13/83)
May become allowed through popular use? Check the "New World Dictionary of the English Language" under "comprise". Definition 3 says: to make up; form; constitute [a nation comprised of 13 states]: in this sense regarded by some as loose usage. Popular usage wins again (please lets not reopen the argument about whether the dictionary definition is correct or just popular). Point is the misuse is recognized. Don't misunderstand my position--I dislike the incorrect use as well. While we are at it, let's hear some discussion of computer sciences' new favorite buzzword: METHODOLOGY (a.k.a method). Dave Stotts, Univ. of Virginia uucp: ...decvax!duke!mcnc!ncsu!uvacs!pds CSnet: pds@uvacs
gh (02/15/83)
What can one say about "methodology"? It is used (or utilized, in their terms) to mean "method" by clods for whom length is a more important criterion in word choice than correctness. These are the people who also use "technology" when they mean "techniques": "This compiler utilizes double-reverse LALR(1) peephole technology." "We are engaged in an effort to apply this technology to compiler validation." That reminds me of two more pet peeves: A recent trend to use "effort" for "project"; and the all-purpose "in terms of" to mean "with regard to" or simply "in". Graeme Hirst Brown University, Computer Science ...!decvax!brunix!gh gh.brown@udel-relay
benson (02/15/83)
There are many words like "methodology" which grate on my ears: orientate phraseology I'm sure we could create a list of buzzwords to avoid. Peter Benson ittdcd-west
mac (02/16/83)
"compactify" -> "compact" ?
crs (02/18/83)
I hope the predecessor to this really did abort. Sorry if it didn't. To "orientate", add degradate I have really heard it used. Charlie Sorsby ...lanl-a!crs
leichter (02/19/83)
One of my complaints - while we are on this topic - is the (over)use of "reference" as a verb. "The article referenced on page 5" could just as well be "the article refered to on page 5". "Refer" has been there as the verb for a long time; "reference" is a "nouned" form. Why "verb" it? (Now some etymologist will discover that "refer" is actually a "verbed" form of the original "reference", in which case I will hide my head in shame.) I say "overuse" because there is a subtle difference between "refer to" and "reference" - "refer to" is more general - I can "refer to" a book without giving you enough information to find it - but when I "reference" a book, there seems (to me) to be an implication that a full bibliographic reference is in there. In most cases that I've seen "reference" used as a verb, though, this writer is not making use of this distinction. -- Jerry decvax!yale-comix!leichter
paul (02/26/83)
We use compactification here.