chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek) (10/08/86)
(The original topic was paging and virtual memory.) >In article <1181@ncr-sd.UUCP> someone (probably Greg Noel) writes: >>... Henry is probably too young to have heard the terms used correctly >>and is using the (usually very reasonable) assumption that if A and B >>always occur together, then A implies B... In article <7190@utzoo.UUCP> henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) replies: >The meanings of words are defined by how they are used, not by how >they used to be used. You are both wrong. Henry is right in using `virtual memory' as he does; his is the meaning that is generally accepted in the field. His usage is unlikely to cause confusion. But the meanings of words are not defined by how they are used. The meanings of words are defined by the listener. Many words are ambiguous. This is not a failing of the language. Problems occur only when writers (or speakers) use such words carelessly. For example, William Strunk Jr. advises us that the word `presently' Has two meanings: ``in a short while'' and ``currently.'' Because of this ambiguity it is best restricted to the first meaning: ``He'll be here presently'' (``soon,'' or ``in a short time''). (_The_Elements_of_Style_, William Strunk Jr. and E. B. White, Third Edition, Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc., New York, p. 57.) I, however, disagree: `It is presently raining' is clear, if not concise. In its other incarnation, the word `presently' may be used as an intensifier. Neither usage stands alone; the writer must provide context. I feel I should also mention that Professor Strunk is, in another sense, correct. He also advises us to `omit needless words.' The intensifier must be justified. Consider, for example, this sentence: `Today was and will be a wonderful day, although it is presently raining'. Without the word `presently', it means something entirely different. While, as White says in the introduction to Chapter V, `... the young writer ... will often find himself steering by stars that are disturbingly in motion', I think that the Computer Science stars surrounding `virtual memory' have long since settled. I must admit that I am even younger a writer than Henry---but I am not, or not usually, a careless one: I know my navigation. Henry is on course. -- In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 1516) UUCP: seismo!umcp-cs!chris CSNet: chris@umcp-cs ARPA: chris@mimsy.umd.edu
chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek) (10/11/86)
>In article <3736@umcp-cs.UUCP> I wrote: >>`Today was and will be a wonderful day, although it is presently >>raining'. Without the word `presently', it means something entirely >>different. In article <3809@ism780c.UUCP>, marty@ism780c.UUCP (Marty Smith) writes: >I don't see the difference. Without `presently', `raining' applies to `it', whose referent is `today', implying that it has been and will continue raining even while the day is wonderful. With the additional word, raining applies to `presently', implying that it was not raining earlier, and soon will stop raining. Thus the shorter sentence might say that rain does not preclude wonderful days, while the longer one may very well say the opposite. The implications are subtle enough to be overwhelmed by any contradictory context, though. Does that make sense? -- In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 1516) UUCP: seismo!umcp-cs!chris CSNet: chris@umcp-cs ARPA: chris@mimsy.umd.edu
marty@ism780c.UUCP (Marty Smith) (10/13/86)
In article <3815@umcp-cs.UUCP> chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek) writes: >>In article <3736@umcp-cs.UUCP> I wrote: >>>`Today was and will be a wonderful day, although it is presently >>>raining'. Without the word `presently', it means something entirely >>>different. > >In article <3809@ism780c.UUCP>, marty@ism780c.UUCP (Marty Smith) writes: >>I don't see the difference. > >Without `presently', `raining' applies to `it', whose referent is >`today', implying that it has been and will continue raining even >while the day is wonderful. With the additional word, raining >applies to `presently', implying that it was not raining earlier, >and soon will stop raining. Thus the shorter sentence might say >that rain does not preclude wonderful days, while the longer one >may very well say the opposite. The implications are subtle enough >to be overwhelmed by any contradictory context, though. > >Does that make sense? To me, 'It is raining' and 'It is presently raining' have the same meaning. The word presently is redundant. Presently modifies raining. If the sentence were written, '...although it presently rains,' then the word presently would not be redundant, I think. Marty Smith
showard@udenva.UUCP (Steve "Blore" Howard) (10/13/86)
In article <875@ptsfb.UUCP> rob@ptsfb.UUCP (Rob Bernardo) writes: >>> Consider, for example, this sentence: >>>`Today was and will be a wonderful day, although it is presently >>>raining'. Without the word `presently', it means something entirely >>>different. > >>I don't see the difference. > >The difference is that if you don't use the word "presently", it sounds >like it is a rainy day, and that either in spite of that or because of >that, the day was/will be wonderful. When the word "presently", what >it implies is that it is "only presently" raining, and that it previously >was and soon will again be a wonderful day. > Sure, but "now" works better than "presently": "Today was and will be a wonderful day, although it is now raining." But who talks like that? -- "I don't need a course in self-awareness to find out who I am and I'd rather have a Big Mac or a Jumbo Jack than all the bean sprouts in Japan" Steve "Blore" Howard, giving Godot just five more minutes to show up {hplabs, seismo}!hao!udenva!showard or {boulder, cires, ucbvax!nbires, cisden}!udenva!showard