| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | Is writing "hard- or software" (shortening the word "hardware") typical in English? Thread poster: Danielle Crouch
|
|---|
Sadek_A wrote: Tom in London wrote:
hard- & soft-ware
WRONG. Per what rule? By whose authority? In what organization?
Period.
| | | | Sadek_A 
Local time: 23:44
English to Arabic
+ ...
Rachel Waddington wrote:
- hardware & software: correct
- all the other variants on the list: incorrect
Again: Per what rule? By whose authority? In what organization?
I'm not going to stop asking this question. And, I'm not asking it for me, I'm asking it for others, today and beyond. Why should they follow you on this one? Convince them, please.
All the variants I stated, and then some more, are out there and being used across all sectors.
How do you plan to stop them and standardize your one-and-only?
| | | | | OK, then ... | Jun 25, 2021 |
Sadek_A wrote: Rachel Waddington wrote:
- hardware & software: correct
- all the other variants on the list: incorrect
Again: Per what rule? By whose authority? In what organization? I'm not going to stop asking this question. And, I'm not asking it for me, I'm asking it for others, today and beyond. Why should they follow you on this one? Convince them, please. All the variants I stated, and then some more, are out there and being used across all sectors. How do you plan to stop them and standardize your one-and-only?
In my experience the normal usage is hardware and software. I don't plan to stop anybody using the other variants you have suggested, unless they happen to occur in a document I am editing, in which case I will correct them.
If you won't accept the authority of a dictionary I don't know what other evidence I can offer that will convince you.
| | | | Sadek_A
Local time: 23:44
English to Arabic
+ ...
Rachel Waddington wrote:
OK, then ...
In my experience the normal usage is hardware and software. I don't plan to stop anybody using the other variants you have suggested, unless they happen to occur in a document I am editing, in which case I will correct them.
If you won't accept the authority of a dictionary I don't know what other evidence I can offer that will convince you.
Agreed.
| | |
|
|
|
Michele Fauble
United States
Local time: 12:44
Member (2006)
Norwegian to English
+ ...
Sadek_A wrote:
Again: Per what rule? By whose authority?
Usage. It’s normal in Scandinavian languages. I’ve never seen it in English.
| | | | Sadek_A
Local time: 23:44
English to Arabic
+ ...
Michele Fauble wrote:
Usage. It’s normal in Scandinavian languages. I’ve never seen it in English.
Usage is dependent on choice, and choice is dependent on person; hence, my earlier "Compound modifiers are hyphenated as per the whims of the author, who holds the only authority on this for all intents and purposes of their own text."
| | | | Michele Fauble
United States
Local time: 12:44
Member (2006)
Norwegian to English
+ ...
| Common usage | Jun 25, 2021 |
Sadek_A wrote: Michele Fauble wrote:
Usage. It’s normal in Scandinavian languages. I’ve never seen it in English.
Usage is dependent on choice, and choice is dependent on person; hence, my earlier "Compound modifiers are hyphenated as per the whims of the author, who holds the only authority on this for all intents and purposes of their own text."
Idiosyncratic personal usage vs common normal usage.
| | | | | @Sadek: Har-dw, and s+oft)war’e | Jun 25, 2021 |
You are arguing that anyone can write whatever they like. You know that’s not the way the world works. There is a consensus on what is right or wrong.
| | |
|
|
|
Stepan Konev
Russian Federation
Local time: 22:44
English to Russian
| Don’t you think it’s ridiculous? | Jun 25, 2021 |
Sadek_A wrote:
Usage is dependent on choice... You, a guy from Egypt, teach native English speakers how to spell English words. Isn’t it sufficient that Tom and Rachel are linguists from UK. They live in a country where the English language was invented and they deal with linguistics all their life. Are you serious in insisting on what you stated above, or just trolling?
In Russian it is very common too as in German. However it is not a slang thing but just a regular grammar rule. If both words in a pair of terms share one root, then the first word is shortened by hyphenation: video- and audiodevices, tele- and radioprogrammes, russian- and englishspeaking delegates, electro- and hydrostations (all these examples are deliberately spelled with English words but in Russian-like manner), etc. However it doesn’t mean I can extend this rule to other languages. I believe our fellow translators from the UK know how to spell words in their language.
[Edited at 2021-06-25 23:22 GMT]
| | | | Sadek_A
Local time: 23:44
English to Arabic
+ ...
| Got some sleep. Where are we now? | Jun 26, 2021 |
Michele Fauble wrote:
Idiosyncratic personal usage vs common normal usage.
Choose what you want. That choice still won't put successful limitation on others.
Stepan Konev wrote:
Don’t you think it’s ridiculous?
1. I do. I do think your post is. You didn't add anything whatsoever to the topic at hand, you just interrupted to reflect some lingering emotions against and in favor of certain persons. That's not how a solid professional mind works!
Stepan Konev wrote:
You, a guy from Egypt, teach native English speakers how to spell English words. Isn’t it sufficient that Tom and Rachel are linguists from UK. They live in a country where the English language was invented and they deal with linguistics all their life.
2. You are being very aggressive. Do NOT turn a professional debate into a personal one.
3. You need to stick to the facts. My location, their location, my nature, their nature are not part of the discussion. The discussion is, again, about 'compound modifiers'.
4. You need to revisit the definitions of 'word' & 'spelling'. Spelling is about characters/letters, their nature, number and order. We are not discussing that. We are not discussing single words either. We are discussing 'compound modifiers', that is a combination of single words put together to provide whole new expressions.
5. Language is NOT 'invented'. You don't go to sleep one evening and wake up the next morning to find a whole new language. Rather, language is developed, evolved and adapted. That's one more concept you have wrong there.
Stepan Konev wrote:
Are you serious insisting what you stated above, or just trolling?
6. The only one trolling is you. And, if you're going to scold me, make sure you phrase your question correctly first.
You've corrected it now, but the earlier version wasn't quite in line with your advocacy of proper English language.
Stepan Konev wrote:
it doesn’t mean I can extend this rule to other languages
7. Extend it or don't extend it. Your preferences bear no effect whatsoever on hyphenation use by authors other than yourself, which the original post was all about. It wasn't about Stepan's hyphenation.
8. This sort of hyphenation is not original to Arabic at all. Hence, all my encounters were in English texts, by English natives.
9. I'm getting the feeling this topic was started for the benefit of machine translation, as this sort of hyphenation is definitely causing troubles there and headaches to the ones handling it. Still, standardizing is not the solution; the 6 or 7 advocates from here can better come together and propose successful algorithms to contain the problem. Can they?
10. It's getting very old that every time others are failing to produce successful arguments to counter mine, someone feels the need to roughly intercept like Stepan here. If lacking on successful arguments, just cease your input, no need to turn it into a war.
| | | |
I don't like "hard- or software" any more than the other native English speakers who have responded, but I would not categorically state that it's wrong. In my work I frequently see constructions like "pre- and postoperative measurements", or "there is a risk of over- or underestimating the significance of ...", and I think the OP's example falls into this category.
The only reason it looks odd is because "hard" and "soft" are not usually used as contrasting prefixes in this way. In... See more I don't like "hard- or software" any more than the other native English speakers who have responded, but I would not categorically state that it's wrong. In my work I frequently see constructions like "pre- and postoperative measurements", or "there is a risk of over- or underestimating the significance of ...", and I think the OP's example falls into this category.
The only reason it looks odd is because "hard" and "soft" are not usually used as contrasting prefixes in this way. In fact the only other example I can think of is "hard- or softcore porn". Is that wrong usage?
What about the "ware" part? I tried a web search for "kitchen- and tableware", but only found (plenty of) examples that omit the hyphen altogether. So is "hard or software", with no hyphen, acceptable? I think not.
Having said all that, I would never deliver a translation that contained this phrase - I would always write "hardware" in full. If I was reviewing somebody else's translation, I would probably express a preference for the full-word form, but would hesitate to flag it as an actual error. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Sadek_A
Local time: 23:44
English to Arabic
+ ...
Ice Scream wrote:
@Sadek: Har-dw, and s+oft)war’e
You are arguing that anyone can write whatever they like. You know that’s not the way the world works. There is a consensus on what is right or wrong.
Why are you telling me that? Why project your inability to control on me?
There is clearly people out there using constructions you deem wrong, and they evidently didn't get your memo.
Why don't you look at them right here right now and say:
Official reference so and so dictates that only hardware & software are the only acceptable construction, and official reference so and so indicates a fine and deportation (if alien) or jail (if citizen) on any one who uses any of the other constructions.
I see like 10 people in this thread, many of whom are claiming to be English natives & experts; however, not a single soul among them delivered a single reference that could be considered as a mind-changer for those using the other constructions.
I provided a link from 2012, where an English native testified to the correctness of the other constructions.
I also provided another link that explained hyphenation.
Still, most so far are ridiculously steering the topic from compound modifiers into Sadek. What's wrong with you people? Seriously! This behavior is NOT normal. You're actively turning almost every professional discussion into a personal one.
| | |
|
|
|
Edward Potter
Spain
Local time: 21:44
Member (2003)
Spanish to English
+ ...
| Good point of discussion | Jun 27, 2021 |
Per what rule? By whose authority? In what organization?
This is actually an excellent question. It gets into the nature of the English language.
In England, Oxford University has attempted to give us some standardized rules for the language. This is a publicly funded university, which means that the UK government has some influence on what the language will be.
In the United States there is no significant government influence of this nature. The language shall be what publishers convince people it is. The more dictionaries you sell, the more your version of the language is accepted.
In the 19th century, Webster´s had the most popular grammar books for schools, not to mention their dictionaries. They tried to simplify the language by substituting "s" with "z" and "our" with "or" for many words. Lot of good that did.
Basically, the English language is a democratic thing. Whatever people are buying is what the rules are. If you can sell us all a "hard-", then that would be the accepted rule.
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 21:44
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| Suspended acjectival compounds | Jun 27, 2021 |
I checked the English language guides on my shelf and found this explanation of it:
1991, Edward Johnson, 447 pages - The Handbook of Good English (Washington Square Press Handbook) (2nd ed) - page 211 & 216
So, while it isn't used nearly as often as in some other languages, it does exist in English.
In my own language (Afrikaans), it is used very often, but the golden rule is that you write the way you speak, so you won't use these structures unless it would be natural to speak like that, too. There doesn't have to be hyphens present in either of the compounds naturally (e.g. both "tea- and tablespoon" and "teapot and -spoon" would be acceptable). As a general rule, you'd use it only true compounds (not e.g. "bisons and -cycles"), and the words should be semantically related (e.g. "bedrock and -room" would be downright silly). Structures like "en- and decrypt" are allowed in Afrikaans, but since practically no-one would actually say "en- and decrypt" when speaking, it would be silly to write it like that.
[Edited at 2021-06-27 09:51 GMT]
| | | | Sadek_A
Local time: 23:44
English to Arabic
+ ...
Some disciplined person to reason with!
1. Edward, let me just start with thanking you for the prudence you've shown. I hope it lasts, and more importantly, expands to others.
2. I can't, however, but wonder as to why you removed my name from the quote.
3. Your post established what I have been telling them over and over in this thread. There is no standard rule for this particular issue; hence, there is no one-and-only construction.
4. Given that 'di... See more Some disciplined person to reason with!
1. Edward, let me just start with thanking you for the prudence you've shown. I hope it lasts, and more importantly, expands to others.
2. I can't, however, but wonder as to why you removed my name from the quote.
3. Your post established what I have been telling them over and over in this thread. There is no standard rule for this particular issue; hence, there is no one-and-only construction.
4. Given that 'dictionary' was used in this thread, as nothing but a failed argument though, let's review what Merriam Webster has to say on the topic:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/help/faq-compound-words
"Because of the variety of standard practice, the choice among the styles for a given compound represents one of the most common and vexing of all style issues writers encounter."
"A dictionary generally will not list temporary compounds, those created to meet a writer's need at a particular moment. Most compounds whose meanings are self–evident from the meanings of their component words also will not be listed in the dictionary, even if they are permanent and widely used."
"When compounds begin to be used widely, there may be significant variation in how writers style them, and it can take years to achieve a high degree of consistency in their format. For many terms, it is often completely acceptable to choose freely among open, hyphenated, and closed alternatives, even though the term has been used in English for an extended period (for instance, lifestyle, life–style, or life style)."
"Styling Internet– and Computer–Related Terms
Internet–related compounds are still so new that their preferred styling remains in flux, with the same compound styled different ways in different publications."
5. https://stylemanual.com.au/contents/editing/punctuation/hyphens/hyphenation-tips-and-guidelines
"Did you know? New words are often created by compounding (where 2 or more words are brought together to form a single word). The usual path for a new word is for 2 words (eg to and day) to become hyphenated (to-day) and then for the hyphen to be dropped (today).
Many of the single words we know today started life as 2 or more words. But the longer form now looks strange. For example:
any thing
clock work
every one
for ever
good bye
in stead
none the less
note book
some body
teen age
to morrow
waist coat
what so ever."
6. HrisC, te l.a, henw ouy akem a ooboob, hatw od ouy ays?
7. Thanks, Samuel, you may review all the references I provided so far. You won't be able to label some other author's hyphenation as 'silly', you can only refrain from using this suspensive yourself, and only yourself. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Is writing "hard- or software" (shortening the word "hardware") typical in English? | Trados Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
| | CafeTran Espresso | You've never met a CAT tool this clever!
Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer.
Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools.
Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
