Re: Help to improve new package (djmount)
Justin B Rye <jbr@edlug.org.uk> wrote:
> MJ Ray wrote:
> > Isn't that just a hangover of the first-used name? In general,
> > Wikipedia is not a primary source and should not be cited itself.
>
> I'm not trying to find an authority to tell me what's correct. I'm
> pointing at primary evidence of current usage. Wikipedia is a text
> written by people who clearly know what a filesystem is and
> consistently choose to write it as "file system" (and to make the
> one-word version redirect to the two-word version). [...]
Wikipedia is written by an infinite number of monkeys, as well as some
people who know what things are. Do we know the reason for the
old-fashioned splitting?
> I wonder if Apple base their documentation style guide on research
> about what terms normal users are familiar with? [...]
Again, we don't know Apple's reasons.
> >> As with "web server", the problem is that technical specialists are
> >> always the first to think of these terms as words in their own
> >> right, while the general public still sees that as obscure and
> >> intimidating.
> >
> > I'm not convinced by that: got data?
>
> As it happens, I also asked two nearby users; one of them said he
> would expect "file system" and the other said "file-system", an
> option I hadn't considered.
An anecdote isn't data.
I understand that the hyphenation of nouns is frequently a middle step
on the road to becoming a single word, so that doesn't surprise me.
> Or are you asking for evidence that unfamiliar jargon is seen as
> obscure and intimidating?
I'm asking for evidence that "filesystem" is seen by the general
public as more obscure and intimidating than "file system".
[...]
> > So, all else being equal, adverbs after verbs!
>
> When two constructions are both grammatical, and may convey subtly
> different senses, a taboo against one of the alternatives serves
> only to restrict your expressive potential. Consider the following
> two sentences:
> - She answered the king's question foolishly.
> - She foolishly answered the king's question.
The second one is ambiguous. To have the sense of it being a foolish
action, it could be written more clearly as "Foolishly, ...".
But, as I wrote: "all else being equal". Different meanings is not
all else being equal.
Hope that explains,
--
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
Reply to: