=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= EDline Vol. 6, no. 26 Editorial mailing list (digest version) Published by the Electric Editors =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Contents: [1] Editorial Q & A [2od] Open/gappy lines [2oh] The "pound" or "hash" or "square" key? [2ok] Ethnic terminology: 'Native American' or ...? [2or] 'Gender' versus 'sex' [2os] Britain in Europe [2ot] British Commonwealth [Offshoot of [2os] Britain in Europe] [6] Just for fun [8] Administration =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= --[1] Editorial ------------------------------------------------ EDline has moved to Topica Our automated EDline mailing list provider, Listbot, has now closed and so the automated list has been moved to Topica. Messages for distribution to the automated list should be sent to: EDline@topica.com Topica allows two options for receiving messages: individual messages or digests. You can choose which method you prefer by logging in to Topica and changing your 'My Topica' preferences for EDline. There is an automated digest sent every 10 messages. This weekly digest of messages will continue to be produced and mailed as before. Contributions from digest subscribers should be sent to: bywater@ntlworld.com Thanks for all your support over the years. EDline has been in existence - in one form or another - for almost 5 years now. Let's hope that EDline continues to be a lively discussion forum. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ A message from Iain Brown: I would like to thank all EDliners who sent such kind messages of goodwill over the past four months as I struggled with serious illness. Your messages were most uplifting and showed how important you find the work of the Electric Editors and the people behind this project. I had a relaxing time in Australia, and am on the road to recovery. Whilst there, I was privileged to have the opportunity to address two meetings of editors, in Canberra and Sydney. It was a wonderful opportunity to meet many other editors and fellow Electric Editors, and to gain some valuable feedback on the resources available from the EE Website. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ EDline digests Jane and I are am grateful to all our readers for their patience in waiting for the next batch of EDline digests. I have spent the last couple of weeks sorting over a megabyte of messages into a logical and proper order for despatch. I have heard that some EDliners have received their digest as an attachment, rather than in the body of the message. I have thus tried to format and divide each digest issue into messages of approximately 20 Kb in size. I trust this will resolve the irritation for some readers. With 4,500 lines of text to read in digests 6.26 to 6.37, I am sure the wait was worth it. ---[2] Q & A --------------------------------------------------- ** [2od] Open/gappy lines Date: Thurs, 14 June 2001 From: Susan Strobel, sstrobel@m2k.com Anna Beth McCormack wrote: > If breaking words is a big no-no and the gaps look like missing > teeth, a lesser evil may be to 'anti-edit' and substitute > longer words or two where one would do---depending on your > degree of editorial authority, of course. Most presses have an actual standard that one must meet, that is how much open space can be allowed at the end of a line, usually no more than a pica or two. The same goes for hyphen stacks. Two is almost always tolerated, even three, but four is usually not. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2oh] The "pound" or "hash" or "square" key? Date: Fri, 15 June 2001 From: Barbara Collishaw, Barbara.Collishaw@pwgsc.gc.ca Iain Brown wrote, regarding Piffling trifles, no. 3: > > The symbol on the "pound" key (#) is called an octothorpe. > > The use of the term 'pound key' is unknown to me. I know the > symbol as the hash key (#). More confusingly, I have heard the > same symbol described as the 'square' key on the telephone > keypad. > > How do EDliners in the US, Canada, New Zealand and Australia > describe this key/button? > > Does the usage differ according to what piece of equipment -- > telephone, computer -- is being used? I wanted to add my two cents' worth to the hash mark-pound sign- octothorpe-etc. debate. I did quite a bit of research on it lately, as an entry for our Writing Tips project (Canada's Translation Bureau, TERMIUM PLUS web site) This is what I came up with: hash mark, number sign, pound sign In UNIX and HTML programming, the number sign (#) is called a hash mark. Telephone companies often call it a pound sign, although this can be confused with the £, indicating currency. Examples: The hash mark (#) is very useful in creating Web pages. On North American telephones, the pound sign (#) is found in the lower right-hand corner of the keypad. Please call this mark (#) a number sign! The story of the octothorpe is fascinating: you can do a Google search and read various tales. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2ok] Ethnic terminology: 'Native American' or ...? Date: Fri, 15 June 2001 From: Elaine Firestone, elaine@seawifs.gsfc.nasa.gov Jennifer Bassett wrote: > I am preparing a glossary for Nathaniel Hawthorne's classic > novel _The Scarlet Letter_, in an educational edition aimed at > English language learners world-wide. Hawthorne uses '(Red) > Indian' to refer to the indigenous peoples of America, and I > feel that this term should be glossed for the learner, not for > meaning, but in order to explain that it is not an acceptable > term in current usage. > > My question to Edliners is this. Is 'Native American' still the > most usual and acceptable term in use today? Is the term > 'American Indian' also used? If so, is it thought to be less > acceptable, or simply less frequent? Omar Johns wrote: > Americans probably object to this instinctively because of the > mention of color: it is too close to Hollywood's Redskins. > Apparently the baseball team of the same name has recently come > under some pressure as well. FYI, the Washington Redskins are an American *football* team, not baseball. ----------------------- Date: Mon, 18 June 2001 From: Brendan Atkins, atkinsb@idx.com.au Nick Hudson wrote: > Despite the genesis of these terms, they were and still are > generally accepted by the communities in question, with the > proviso that they must not be abbreviated ('abo' is totally > taboo) and must be written with a capital A. There is some > debate about the preferred noun form (should it be 'an > Aboriginal' or 'an Aborigine'), but neither causes profound > offence. I've just edited a MS in which the author used 'indigenous Australians' for Australian Aborigines, which I changed to Indigenous Australians (with a cap 'I'). Thinking about this politically (and correctly I hope!), it could be argued that people of any ethnic grouping born in Australia are 'indigenous' ('originating in and characterising a particular region or country' -- Macquarie Dict.) as Australia is indeed characterised by its multicultural and multiracial society (perhaps more so than many other nations). And by using 'indigenous' (lc 'i') for Aboriginal Australians, are we not being exclusionist (if that's not too strong a term for it) towards the Australian-born from other backgrounds? The cap 'I' formalises the use of the term (as does the cap 'A' in Aborigine) without potentially excluding others from feeling that they 'belong' here too. ----------------------- Date: Wed, 20 June 2001 From: Anna Beth McCormack, mccormack@goulburn.net.au 'Exclusionist' is not too strong a term. I was born in Australia and so were all my grandparents, and have always felt slightly miffed that Aborigines are described as 'indigenous' but others like myself are not. If I'm not indigenous and not exogenous, what am I? The capital distinction may be useful in theory, but the average reader is unlikely to appreciate it. I think 'indigenous' is better not used at all as an indicator of Aboriginality. ----------------------- Date: Wed, 20 June 2001 From: Shirley Beaver, beaver@nor.com.au As I understand it, "indigenous" refers to those born in a country. The term for the members of the group originally inhabiting the country is "autochthonous". ------------------------- Date: Thurs, 21 June 2001 From: Peter Best, pbest@idl.net.au As an Australian whose forefathers and (foremothers) began arriving here in the first part of the 19th century (and who knows whether there is some aboriginal link as well), I don't claim to be indigenous. I'm happy to leave that to others. But what's wrong with "Aborigine"? Its literal meaning is strong enough support a claim to its being the best descriptive term for the "original inhabitants" of the country. Even with their long presence here, most aboriginal people don't claim to be "sprung from the earth" of Australia. For sheer practicality, please don't start spreading "autochthonous" around, otherwise some empowered "indigenous" groups are going to start insisting on it! Anyway, there's a shorter (and just as inappropriate) Chinese expression that means the same thing - Tu Zu Ren. ------------------------- Date: Thurs, 21 June 2001 From: Anne Weale, anne@anneweale.com Shirley Beaver wrote: > The term for the members of the group originally inhabiting the > country is "autochthonous". Although I'm reasonably well-read, I didn't know this word and, coming across it in a book, would have had to look it up. I don't think many people bother to do that nowadays. Of course if the book is aimed at a scholarly or specialist readership obscure words can be used. But wouldn't autochthonous be out of place in a text for the general reader? ----------------------- Date: Wed, 27 June 2001 From: Michael Fitch, michaelbfitch@supanet.com Brendan Atkins wrote: > I've just edited a MS in which the author used 'indigenous > Australians' for Australian Aborigines, which I changed to > Indigenous Australians (with a cap 'I'). This reminds me of one I edited last year. The title was 'The anthropology of love and anger: the aesthetics of conviviality in Native Amazonia'. It was a contributed volume by a number of anthropologists based in Europe and South America. The decision had been taken by the volume editors, before I became involved, that 'Native' should be capitalized, whether it be a noun or an adjective. In this book, 'indigenous' - uncapitalized - was available as a workaday adjective. I saw no reason to disagree with these decisions. However, it could be that conventions can work in anthropology that wouldn't work in other subjects. Or perhaps it's just assumed that Native Amazonians wouldn't be reading a book in English. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2or] 'Gender' versus 'sex' Date: Mon, 18 June 2001 From: Brendan Atkins, atkinsb@idx.com.au Sabra Ledent wrote: > I am editing a book of tables on U.S. politics, 8th ed. The > tables are inconsistent in their use of the terms sex and > gender. In the tables every possible combination appears: Sex > above Male/Female; Gender above Male/Female; Sex above Men/ > Women; Gender above Men/Women. I have checked out many sources > (including my demographer husband) and there appears to be no > one correct way of doing this these days. Suggestions would be > appreciated. I was saddened to see that birth certificates no longer record 'boy' or 'girl' but now state 'male' or 'female'. My father was a boy, I was a boy but my sons are males. Anyone else feel that something was lost in this change of meaning? Has any midwife or doctor ever said 'Congratulations Mrs Smith -- it's a female!'? +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2os] Britain in Europe Date: Sat, 16 June 2001 From: Mandy Macdonald, MMacdonald44@cs.com Michaael Fitch wrote: > 'Mainland' is always dodgy - it logically excludes ... > Mallorca, Corfu, Capri etc. I once hitchhiked from Cambridge to a village in Sardinia. We got to Dover, crossed France, Switzerland and (mainland) Italy, got a boat to Olbia, took a train to the other end of Sardinia, then crossed to a wee island called San Pietro and a wee village called Carloforte. And how did the people of Carloforte refer to 'mainland' Sardinia? As 'il continente', of course. Just an exercise in relativism ... +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ** [2ot] British Commonwealth [Offshoot of [2os] Britain in Europe] Date: Fri, 15 June 2001 From: Judyth Mermelstein, espresso@e-scape.net Michael Fitch wrote: > 'Britain in Europe' leads me to other thoughts on the quaint > and old-fashioned. I am editing a book intended for an > international student readership. It uses the term 'British > Commonwealth'. Is that acceptable nowadays? I myself would say > 'the Commonwealth'. Would that be understood (1) in the USA, > (2) in Australia, (3) elsewhere in the Commonwealth, > (4) elsewhere in the world? Amongst most educated people, yes, but there is an exception to be made for New Englanders, who just might assume you mean "the Commonwealth of Massachusetts". The term was around long before British ex-colonies became one... ---[6] Just for fun -------------------------------------------- Piffling trifles, no. 11 Donald Duck's middle name is Fauntleroy. ----------------------- Date: Fri, 15 June 2001 From: Christine Shuttleworth, cshuttle@dircon.co.uk "Piffling trifles no. 8" read: > The longest word in the English language, according to the > Oxford English Dictionary, is: > > pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis > > The only other word with the same amount of letters is its > plural, > > pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconioses I am no scientist, and have no idea what the words mean, but surely both of these are two words yoked together - an adjective and a noun? Shouldn't they be: pneumonoultramicroscopic silicovolcanoconiosis, and pneumonoultramicroscopic silicovolcanoconioses ? I have always felt the same about the song "Supercalifragil- isticexpialidocious". Apart from the fact that the word itself is (deliberately) meaningless, I think of it as two adjectives stuck together, and always want a space, or comma, after "supercali- fragilistic". It seems contrary to all principles to claim that it is one word. Am I being over-pedantic? (I feel it's all right to be just a little pedantic.) ----------------------- Date: Mon, 18 June 2001 From: Iwan Thomas, iwan@frame.org.uk > I have always felt the same about the song > "Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious". Reminds of a brilliant newspaper headline of recent vintage. Inverness Caledonian Thistle had beaten the mighty Glasgow Celtic, and the Sun(?) subeditor came up with "Super Caley Go Ballistic, Celtic Are Atrocious" ----------------------- Date: Mon, 18 June 2001 From: Michael Stone, mike@wholeearthmag.com The word is not in my (old) edition of the OED, but here's a quote from the "Ask Dr. Dictionary" website: It is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary "a factitious word alleged to mean 'a lung disease caused by the inhalation of very fine silica dust' but occurring chiefly as an instance of a very long word." My OED edition cites an instance of "pneumonokoniosis" from 1866 as a generic term proposed for a variety of lung diseases caused by the inhalation of dust-like particles. ------------------------- Date: Thurs, 21 June 2001 From: Anne Greiner, agreiner@pcug.org.au > I am no scientist, and have no idea what the words mean, but > surely both of these are two words yoked together - an > adjective and a noun? Shouldn't they be: > > pneumonoultramicroscopic silicovolcanoconiosis, > > and > > pneumonoultramicroscopic silicovolcanoconioses ? Absolutely not! It is a perfectly good word, and if one has a medical background, a very descriptive (if cumbersome) one, probably saving several sentences :-) Each of the roots, e.g. pneumo, noultro, micro, scopic, silico, volcano, coni, are descriptive, and lastly the suffix osis, meaning a condition having all of the preceding, leads the reader to assume that the patient has a fibrotic condition of the lungs caused by the inhalation of tiny glassy silicon containing particles that have been produced in a process by means of great heat. I'm also rather fond of "haemangiopericytoma" --- Thanks also to Susannah Driver-Barstow for her contribution ---[8] Administration ------------------------------------------ EDline is a discussion list about editorial and business matters for members of the publishing community. It focuses on issues of interest to professional editors, proofreaders, typesetters, writers and those in associated jobs. To post to the mailing list via Topica, use the following address: EDline@topica.com For digest subscribers, please post your EDline messages to: bywater@ntlworld.com * Accented characters: When writing accented characters, please adopt the following convention to show the accent after the character: / acute \ grave ^ circumflex ~ tilde " umlaut/diaeresis , cedilla % o slash aa a ring sz German double s | long s _ line above letter * Homepage and back issues: Visit the Electric Editors at: < http://www.electriceditors.net/ > Archives of the EDline automated discussions can be found at: < http://www.topica.com/lists/EDline > All messages contributed to EDline, whether automated or digest versions, are archived on the Electric Editors' Website. These archives can be found at: < http://www.electriceditors.net/EDline/ > --------- ** The views expressed in this mailing list are strictly those of the individual contributors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the moderators or of the Electric Editors. ** Articles (c) 2001, by individual contributors Design (c) 1996, 1997, 2000 Iain Brown Compilation (c) 2001, Iain Brown / The Electric Editors =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= END OF EDline 6.26 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=