eReader VS. eBook Reader

[Ea]

Originally Posted by DaleDe

There is no such body in the USA that I am aware of. The dictionary writers used to claim to do this but they have abdicated this responsibility and now claim to only document usage. There are groups that attempt to document usage and determine if there is sufficient usage make it a real word but no regulation exisis. American English is a very dynamic language.

Dale

So it's up to individual schools (for example) to figure out, which guidelines and conventions to use? And basically those who can publish the most popular dictionary "wins"? It's probably fine, but it is a very strange thought for me With no state authority it leaves 'the people' without influence.

[=X=]

You'll all have to excuse me for going by going back on topic.

But I've been one of those folks that have avoided using the term 'ereader' as a generic term and used "eBook reader" for clarity. However I've noticed that most journalist use the term ereader. So then wha'ts the point of using a clearer term if the rest of the industry is using another term?

Plus ereader is shorter to type

=X=

[DaleDe]

Originally Posted by Ea

So it's up to individual schools (for example) to figure out, which guidelines and conventions to use? And basically those who can publish the most popular dictionary "wins"? It's probably fine, but it is a very strange thought for me With no state authority it leaves 'the people' without influence.

There is certainly influence but no regulation. The government has standards for its own publications and schools have books defining the preferred forms and of course the real authority is the built in spelling checker Spelling is pretty standardized, new words added every year, and grammar is taught in the schools in a standardized way. The country is so large that accents and local usage does happen. The is exacerbated by the state system within the US. Individual states regulate things like text books and a teacher typically must have knowledge of the local states history including formal courses. This latter requirement causes teachers not to move between states and therefore the localization of language tends to get taught and propagated.

Dale

[kazbates]

Originally Posted by Ea

So it's up to individual schools (for example) to figure out, which guidelines and conventions to use? And basically those who can publish the most popular dictionary "wins"? It's probably fine, but it is a very strange thought for me With no state authority it leaves 'the people' without influence.

As DaleDe has already stated, English is very dynamic. New words come along, old words fade out through lack of use. Even between English speaking countries you will find a diverse use and spelling of words. What might be a common usage or spelling here in the US would not be in the UK. Generally, when I finish typing a post and before I submit it, I run spell checker. If I am quoting someone from the UK, the spell checker may find a word that it thinks is spelled incorrectly but is, in actuality, spelled correctly for the original poster. My spell checker is set for US English.

[kazbates]

Originally Posted by DaleDe

There is certainly influence but no regulation. The government has standards for its own publications and schools have books defining the preferred forms and of course the real authority is the built in spelling checker Spelling is pretty standardized, new words added every year, and grammar is taught in the schools in a standardized way. The country is so large that accents and local usage does happen. The is exacerbated by the state system within the US. Individual states regulate things like text books and a teacher typically must have knowledge of the local states history including formal courses. This latter requirement causes teachers not to move between states and therefore the localization of language tends to get taught and propagated.

Dale

You're obviously a much faster typist than I am!

We teachers rely on the textbooks and dictionaries that are provided by the School Boards of our district. Textbook adoption is generally done through a committee of educators (both teachers and administrators), where they sit through presentations of available textbook series and then preview them for content. Generally a textbook adoption lasts around 5 years (at least at the Elementary level and contingent upon the school district's needs). I guess the bottom line is that, ultimately, it is the publishers who tell us what is correct as they are the ones printing and publishing the textbooks.

[Ea]

Originally Posted by kazbates

....
Generally, when I finish typing a post and before I submit it, I run spell checker. If I am quoting someone from the UK, the spell checker may find a word that it thinks is spelled incorrectly but is, in actuality, spelled correctly for the original poster. My spell checker is set for US English.

Which also means you rely on the quality of the spell-checker's dictionary. I guess it's not so bad nowadays, but a reason I am wary of spell-checkers, is that they have had a detrimental effect on written Danish. Ten years ago, the standard dictionaries couldn't usually handle compund words, which are common, and the result is that many people today often split up words that shouldn't be. The dictionaries have gotten better, but some damage has been done. I still use a spell checker because I tend to make a lot of typos, but I don't rely on it 100 percent for the spelling.

[ahi]

Originally Posted by kazbates

As DaleDe has already stated, English is very dynamic. New words come along, old words fade out through lack of use. Even between English speaking countries you will find a diverse use and spelling of words. What might be a common usage or spelling here in the US would not be in the UK. Generally, when I finish typing a post and before I submit it, I run spell checker. If I am quoting someone from the UK, the spell checker may find a word that it thinks is spelled incorrectly but is, in actuality, spelled correctly for the original poster. My spell checker is set for US English.

"English is very dynamic" seems like a questionable truism to me.

The fact that various blobs of speakers adopt more words from other languages than usual doesn't make the language itself dynamic... particularly since most of those words never make it into broad/general use.

Furthermore talking about "the English language" is becoming increasingly a misnomer. It's really "the English languages". Mutual intelligibility between British and American, Australian and American, Indian and American dialects can increasingly depend on the subject matter and the willingness of both speakers to try to accommodate the other one.

Ultimately "dynamism" in a language is presumably another way of referring to "speed of language change". I don't think historically English is a great speeder in terms of language change, and while one might argue that the separation into dialects/languages is suggestive of the speed increasing, I think it rather has to do with the fact that all the dialects are going in somewhat different directions... not so much that they are going faster than the language historically has.

- Ahi

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by =X=

But I've been one of those folks that have avoided using the term 'ereader' as a generic term and used "eBook reader" for clarity. However I've noticed that most journalist use the term ereader. So then wha'ts the point of using a clearer term if the rest of the industry is using another term?

Plus ereader is shorter to type

=X=

eReader seems the name of choice in the UK.
People know what I'm talking about if I call it that - other terms just get blank looks.

[Ea]

Originally Posted by ahi

"English is very dynamic" seems like a questionable truism to me.

The fact that various blobs of speakers adopt more words from other languages than usual doesn't make the language itself dynamic... particularly since most of those words never make it into broad/general use.

Furthermore talking about "the English language" is becoming increasingly a misnomer. It's really "the English languages". Mutual intelligibility between British and American, Australian and American, Indian and American dialects can increasingly depend on the subject matter and the willingness of both speakers to try to accommodate the other one.
....

I would tend to - more or less - agree. All languages that are in use, can be said to be dynamic as they will adapt to changes, and include new words or concepts.

I'm not sure how to distinguish between more or less dynamic? How can one pin down, or define, speed of language change? If it is words used by a minority and is a recent change, can it then be said to be truly a part of the 'English language' or is it just a dialect or even a fad?

Another example; the official approach to spelling and langage here is rather conservative - but that doesn't mean that spoken language is nearly as conservative. It changes as lot and there are fads - they just don't make it into dictionaries. Is Danish dynamic?

I would agree that a special "dynamic" of English is the development of branches, such as American, British, Australian, Indian, South African (and probably a few more).

[Argel]

Interesting to note that in the 'official Sony PR' thread, as I predicted, 'reader' is the default term. Then there is that little blue box at the top right of every Mobileread posting that starts 'Reader:...'

Game over, I think.

[ahi]

Originally Posted by Ea

I'm not sure how to distinguish between more or less dynamic? How can one pin down, or define, speed of language change? If it is words used by a minority and is a recent change, can it then be said to be truly a part of the 'English language' or is it just a dialect or even a fad?

I think language change is only meaningfully assessable in the past. And the way to do it is to take literature producing X hundred years ago from the languages you wish to compare, and assess to what extant each is still intelligible to modern-day speakers.

To be reasonably accurate, such a test might have to change the source text slightly to alter/remove/update aspects of the orthography that would befuddle modern readers for reasons that have nothing to do with language change. (e.g.: Like the penchant of publishers/writers of certain periods to add extra letters into words for purely visual aesthetics. Or a switch of writing system precipitated by mostly or solely political reasons as opposed to linguistic ones.)

I would say any words that are spoken in small isolated communities in ways that do not give said words hope of being adopted into at least a large regional standard lexicon should not be viewed as being part of English in general terms, only a part of a particular minor dialect (or perhaps only minor subdialect) of English.

While I would have difficulty deciding where precisely to draw the line, an inability to deal with corner-cases decisively obviously does not mean that the classifications on either side of said corner-cases are somehow invalid.

About present-day and future processes of language change, I think the best we can have are educated guesses.

Originally Posted by Ea

Another example; the official approach to spelling and langage here is rather conservative - but that doesn't mean that spoken language is nearly as conservative. It changes as lot and there are fads - they just don't make it into dictionaries. Is Danish dynamic?

On this, I am unqualified to comment.

Originally Posted by Ea

I would agree that a special "dynamic" of English is the development of branches, such as American, British, Australian, Indian, South African (and probably a few more).

I don't know if I'd call this special... and your use of "dynamic" as a noun I think is unrelated to English being described as being dynamic.

What is happening to the American, British, Australian, Indian, and South African English dialects/languages is very plainly what happens to reasonably isolated populations of speakers that once spoke the same language.

I see it as no different than Spanish, French, Italian, Portuguese, et al are today. At an earlier stage, but otherwise quite analogous I think.

My sense is that certain views about English relate to its wide use in the world which is seen as linguistic success (as opposed to the political one that it is) and to which people feel the need to ascribe linguistic reasons.

The truth, as I see it, is that English is the relatively young descendant of what was essentially a "contact language" (between the Anglo-Saxons and the Normans) merger of Germanic and Romance that to this date hasn't learned to exploit the full benefit of the alphabet*. (Literacy in English being a needlessly greater challenge than literacy in many other languages with largely or wholely phonetic writing sytems.)

- Ahi

* Or, rather, of the Latin alphabet to which they switched--as Old English' use of Old English runes was, I believe, entirely phonetic.

[kazbates]

Originally Posted by Argel

Interesting to note that in the 'official Sony PR' thread, as I predicted, 'reader' is the default term. Then there is that little blue box at the top right of every Mobileread posting that starts 'Reader:...'

Game over, I think.

I think the term "reader" works just fine! And for our French companions, a word that means reader, "liseuse". See. . .we circled right back around. I do so love a circular story.

[Moejoe]

*cranks up drama-meter to 11*

Liseuse or death!!

[Argel]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

*cranks up drama-meter to 11*

Liseuse or death!!

Hmmm. "Just a moment while I put my death in my backpack to read on the train."

No, doesn't really work.

I'd love it to be liseuse but without equal passion on the part of a large number, see sig.

[doreenjoy]

I think it's up to the Chicago Manual of Style and the Associated Press to determine correctness.