|
Post by Twoddle on Jun 18, 2008 18:45:17 GMT
Why should the queen get a telegram when ordinary centenarians only get a telemessage? Especially as - they have to apply for them;
- the Post Office stopped telegrams years ago?
Thanks, Alan. I'm glad that's been sorted out: the Queen will have to apply to herself for a telegram, and then send herself a telemessage. Got it!
|
|
|
Post by TfS on Jun 18, 2008 20:54:59 GMT
"God save our gracious me!"
|
|
|
Post by Tone on Jun 18, 2008 21:08:41 GMT
>Nor I, Tone, for the same reason as stated by Paul. Neither PIN nor ATM refers to a system:<Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. (Gosh, that's unusual. ) I did nor mean to imply that the original invention/creation used that term for the system, merely that in the expression "PIN number" it is being so used. Thus, "Please enter your number into the PIN system". Tone
|
|
|
Post by Twoddle on Jun 18, 2008 21:16:35 GMT
>Nor I, Tone, for the same reason as stated by Paul. Neither PIN nor ATM refers to a system:<Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. (Gosh, that's unusual. ) I did nor mean to imply that the original invention/creation used that term for the system, merely that in the expression "PIN number" it is being so used. Thus, "Please enter your number into the PIN system". Tone But the machines never ask me to enter my number into the PIN system, Tone; they ask me to enter my PIN.
|
|
|
Post by Sue M-V on Jun 18, 2008 22:14:40 GMT
By the way, who'll send the Queen a telegram if she makes it to her centenary? I suppose, the descendants of those who sent them to her mother. Sue
|
|
|
Post by Barry on Jun 18, 2008 22:33:53 GMT
"God save our gracious me!"
Er ... I think that'll be "God save our gracious us!" (Her Maj being perpetually plural when it comes to pronouns)
|
|
|
Post by TfS on Jun 19, 2008 7:29:16 GMT
"God save our gracious me!"Er ... I think that'll be "God save our gracious us!" (Her Maj being perpetually plural when it comes to pronouns) Ooops! Am I guilty of lèse majesté now?
|
|
|
Post by Dave M on Jun 19, 2008 8:17:31 GMT
> Her Maj being perpetually plural when it comes to pronouns <
So ... er ... you mean THEIR majesties, Barry!
|
|
|
Post by Barry on Jun 19, 2008 16:52:40 GMT
Got me, Dave. I should have written 'first-person pronouns'.
|
|
|
Post by Tone on Jun 19, 2008 20:38:55 GMT
>But the machines never ask me to enter my number into the PIN system, Tone; they ask me to enter my PIN.<
The machines might not, but the people do!
Tone
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on Jun 19, 2008 21:03:58 GMT
I've never heard anyone refer to a PIN system. "CHIP and PIN" just possibly, but even then never when presented with an authorisation device: people always say "please type your number" or similar -- or they just hand you the device (or wave at it vaguely if it's a fixed one).
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Jun 21, 2008 10:04:14 GMT
>But the machines never ask me to enter my number into the PIN system, Tone; they ask me to enter my PIN.<The machines might not, but the people do! Tone Tone, I think that strictly you are incorrect on this point. We are asked to enter our Personal Identification Number or PIN. Therefore, to ask us to enter our PIN number is simply unnecessary duplication. In a similar way, so is referring to AC current or the AIB Bank. It is absolutely clear what the initialisms stand for. All of that said, I accept also that some of these expressions have effectively entered the vernacular, including PIN number. It is as though people have lost sight of what the letters P I N stood for and have developed a new noun, the PIN, which can have a number, the PIN number associated with it. This is a simple explanation of the phenomenon and far easier to accept (for me, at least) than jumping through the linguistic hoops about whether these things are systems, etc. Occam's razor, and all that.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on Jun 21, 2008 13:16:03 GMT
I agree with Pete -- unless you know (and remind yourself) what these stings stand for, they sound unnatural. If someone says "enter your pin" it sound like a request to use one of those spiky things, so it's natural to call it a "pin number". What sort of number -- a PIN number. Really, I suppose they should say "personal identification number", but who'd do that?
ATM is the same: what type of machine is it -- an ATM machine!
I disagree about the AIB Bank, though. I used to work for a company called "International Computers Limited". After a corporate restructuring it became "ICL Limited". That was a conscious decision to change from being known as "International Computers" to "ICL" -- and in law ICL didn't stand for anything, it was just the name of the company. You and I might guess that the choice of ICL was made to keep some link with the past (which it was) but that still doesn't make it actually stand for anything.
Quite possibly (I haven't googled) AIB is the same. It may be trying to play down its Irishness?
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Jun 21, 2008 19:24:16 GMT
Paul, I agree with you about AIB, ICL and the like. But isn't it the same point I was making about PIN, except that AIB and ICL deliberately renamed themselves with those intialisms?
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on Jun 21, 2008 19:42:55 GMT
Pete, maybe! I was thinking about your "... is simply unnecessary duplication. In a similar way, so is referring to ... the AIB Bank." I don't think there's any duplication there at all, unnecessary or not.
|
|