Do you read e-books?

[boxcorner]

Ebooks have to be read on a e-reader, right?

Do you read pbooks, as well as e-books?

Or, do p-books no longer matter to you?

I'm still reading e-books and haven't quite reached ebooks yet.

Is there a natural progression, from e-books to ebooks?

Some people seem to read ebooks, without passing through the transition.

I used to send e-mails to friends about this and they'd reply by email.

Email doesn't seem right to me, though, so I thought I'd just mention it here.

Is this just an expression of OCD, or is there a natural language progression involved?

Do hyphenated e-words evolve naturally into concatenated ones?

Does consistency matter at all?

Are there any lexicographers here, who would care to share their wisdom on this?

Does any of this matter at all, or should I just let you get back to that electronic book you're reading?

[ocgforme]

I'm no lexicographer, just fond of language in general, so here's a stab at a layman's explanation:

You're experiencing a couple of language phenomenon at once with these coined words. Firstly, humans tend to shorten words which are used often. That's how perambulators became prams, lol. (And why no one says "electronic mail" when "e-mail" is just as readily understood.) Secondly, *written* words which begin as hyphenated compound words (or created words like e-mail) *also* tend to be "Anglicized" into a standard, single word, though that tended to happen more slowly before the 20th century. Many centuries ago, "to-morrow" was a valid word and the accepted spelling. Now it's "tomorrow", and the earlier form is barely seen even in poetry a century old. "For ever" was the accepted form for centuries, but now we use "forever" and *rarely* see the equally valid but "old fashioned" form outside of formal poetry or a single, emphatic use in a prose piece.

The same type of thing happens when a name used as an adjective transitions into common English. A good example: mohawk. Originally, the word was capitalized, just as we still do for "Chinese food" or "French toast", but gradually, the word implied less "the hairstyle worn by warriors of the Mohawk tribe" --which would be capitalized-- and more "that particular hairstyle that makes some people point and laugh". It's a more generalized meaning, and thus is no longer capitalized. Annoyingly, I'm seeing the phrase "french fries" everywhere, but it should be *French fries*. Still. Harrumph.

Pbook won't become standard usage (I desperately hope), in part because it's harder to blend two consonants when speaking without adding a vowel sound-- so it's going to *feel* awkward and *look* awkward. E-mail is a good example of what works: it's got a vowel in the first syllable, and a dipthong (vowel pair) in the second syllable. No fuss, no muss, and if people forget the hyphen, it follows the rules they know about their native language (usually a subconscious framework and not formally studied). Drop the hyphen and it's a "regular word", see?

...Then again, some overly-certified "experts" formally changed the plural of octopus to 'octopuses', simply to make spelling "easier". Let's gut the perfectly valid, Latin-based, LOGICAL format for singular and plural nouns, just because our colleges have turned out two generations of teachers who don't *know* the rule, rather than REALLY fix the problem.

[gmw]

I jumped straight to ebooks, e-books just didn't interest me. I've had a lot of trouble with pbooks though and so decided to stay with paper books, hardcovers and paperbacks. More seriously (but still not very), I don't really see much difference between e-books and ebooks. It seems to me that something like e. book (and e. mail etc.) would have made some sort of sense perhaps, but then sense rarely gets much of a look in with this sort of stuff.

[Marc Johnson]

I emailed Grammar Girl about this once and she said that 'ebooks' or 'e-books' is fine. Things tend to start out with hyphen but then disappear after time like email. However, the one thing she said was wrong was 'eBooks.'

[jehane]

On ebooks - I tend not to put in the hyphen because I don't think it's necessary.

French fries - aren't they Belgian, anyway?

Octopus plurals - I'm sure I came across a thread here once about the correct plural for octopus. IIRC octopus has Greek etymology so the correct plural is octopodes.

And here is the link

[neilmarr]

As Boxcorner says, frequnetly used words tend to be shorted with familiarity -- just ask any Tom, Dick or Harry and he'll tell you all about that.

Phrases also contract: hi = howdy = how do you do? 'Water Closet' would make an awkward looking sign to hang outside the WC.

What's always happened in the evolution of the English language is happening faster than ever now. We use initials for complex but often used technical terms to the extent that many users may not even recall the original as the initials take over the job: DOS, PDF, HTML, PC ... and see my attachment: How many newcomers to MR have had to ask us what DRM means? And notice there's my little stylised bee logo in there. Says a lot to those in the know, just like an emoticon does for so many familiar with the style of a word-saving and hurried forum message.

When electronic communication via internet kicked in, few folks beyond scribes like me and office secretaries were skilled typists and plodded along pecking at keys with one or two fingers. This had several results: a whole tidal wave of new abbreviations and and acronyms, punctuation being skipped, even capitals dropped. Now we have a growing generation where few youngsters can't handle a keyboard, but they LOL at the thought of the gr8 effort involved in spelling out what they mean and/or trying to express it originally.

If meaningful communication itself isn't damaged, this can be a positive step. I guess that -- without even realising it -- today's youngsters read and write more than their parents and grandparents ever did at the same ago and interact with a greater pool of kids in other towns and even other countries than any generation before them. Of course, these kids in their emails and cellphone text messages and on forums talk nonsense much of the time, but that's nothing new, and it doesn't hurt as long as it doesn't become a lifelong habit.

Does written language ultimately suffer? Dunno. I do know that my eldest grandchild writes jibberish to her facebook pals, but she speaks well when she flies in for a visit, sends me perfectly grammatically composed cards and letters and is an avid reader of novels.

I reckon that those of us to whom the use of language is a vital tool of the trade will always be sticklers (but way back, even many of us learned Pitman's shorthand/stenography to cut corners in the interest of speed -- I still write grocery lists that way). But if we know the rules, ain't nothin' wrong with breaking 'em when the occasion suits, eh?

There's no set rule with many of these newly formed words created from contracted phrases, so -- as with genes and memes -- a winning mutation will stick.

So I'm happy to swap emails via my PC on the net and much prefer my ebooks these days to the treebook alternative. OK?

Salut. Neil

[GlenBarrington]

Originally Posted by Marc Johnson

I emailed Grammar Girl about this once and she said that 'ebooks' or 'e-books' is fine. Things tend to start out with hyphen but then disappear after time like email. However, the one thing she said was wrong was 'eBooks.'

I like 'eBook' over 'ebook'. My reasoning is that 'eBook' emphasizes 'book' over the 'electronic', while with 'ebook' both 'electronic' and 'book' have similar emphasis. One part of the new word describes the media, the other part describes the function. To me, the function should outweigh the media in most situations.

Thank God, Grammar Girl isn't Grammar Woman!

[SeaBookGuy]

Google dislikes "audiobook" as one word.

[Xanthe]

I'm finding the lag time between word usage and search-term-acceptance unacceptable.

I want the search term "ereader" to be universal. I'm tired of going on electronic shopping sites and having to cycle through "reader" or "ereader" or "ebook" or "book reader", among others, just to try to get to their pages that may or may not contain an ebook reader. If I put in "reader" I might get listings of Sony Readers, but then again, I might just get a page of card readers.

[desertgrandma]

"e-book"

Because it isn't an "electronicbook"

Its an "electronic book".

[ocgforme]

Gee, another reason to chuck my Webster's Dictionary out. It won't even make good compost, the silly thing.

But, back ON topic, I do prefer ebook; eBook isn't correct because in English we only capitalize proper nouns, and Book only meets that criteria in Firefly.

[wvcherrybomb]

Originally Posted by GlenBarrington

I like 'eBook' over 'ebook'.

Me too. And "eReader" over "ereader" ... I think the whole second letter capital started with iPod.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by boxcorner

Ebooks have to be read on a e-reader, right?

No.

I abstain from answering the rest of the questions, on the grounds that I have too much to read.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by ocgforme

...Then again, some overly-certified "experts" formally changed the plural of octopus to 'octopuses', simply to make spelling "easier". Let's gut the perfectly valid, Latin-based, LOGICAL format for singular and plural nouns, just because our colleges have turned out two generations of teachers who don't *know* the rule, rather than REALLY fix the problem.

No, no, NO! It's Greek, it's not Latin. Octopuses has always been correct, and "octopi" has always been wrong. (It's hypercorrection, from people thinking that the "-us" is from a masculine Latin verb forming its plural by "-i". But it doesn't have a Latin root at all.

Platypuses is also correct, for the same reason.

Something really objectionable, IMO, is the NY Times writing "millenniums" for "millennia". That really grates...

[boxcorner]

Apparently the BBC prefers e-book and e-reader.

Google to launch e-book store
Amazon is releasing a slimmed-down Kindle e-reader with a beefed-up selection of books for the UK market