alexknibb
Silver
"I have never fallen in love. I've stepped in it a few times..."
Posts: 194
|
Post by alexknibb on Aug 10, 2009 11:25:10 GMT
Hi all. Could someone shed some light on whether diseases should have capital letters, please? I don't necessarily mean things like Alzheimer's, as this is someone's name, but the other ones like influenza and pneumonia. My instinct is not to capitalise them, but then again they are names, so... Anyway, I'm confused. If someone does know the answer either way and can reference it, I would be very much obliged. It could help with our house style document too... Thanks, Alex.
|
|
|
Post by Alan Palmer on Aug 10, 2009 15:44:18 GMT
I would never think of capitalising the name of a disease, unless, as you suggest, it is an eponym. I don't know of a specific reference, but the Wikipedia article on capitalisation lists various instances where nouns should be capitalised, and the names of diseases aren't one of them. They do mention that it is matter of style, though, with the trend at present to all lower-case.
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Aug 10, 2009 17:12:52 GMT
I'm with Alan on this. I see no reason to capitalise disease names, in the same way that I don't capitalise nouns generally.
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Aug 11, 2009 5:16:13 GMT
[/blockquote][/quote] Note that some diseases may use an acronym or initialism that is capitalized while the name from which it comes is not: - AIDS for acquired immune deficiency syndrome (or acquired immunodeficency syndrome)
- HIV for human immunodeficency virus (this isn't actually the disease but the virus associated with AIDS)
- H1N1 for the swine flu virus (again the virus, not the disease)
I hope that helps.
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Aug 11, 2009 7:25:19 GMT
[/li][li]H1N1 for the swine flu virus (again the virus, not the disease)[/list]
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on Aug 17, 2009 20:05:07 GMT
I agree: do not capitalise.
It's "proper names" (or "proper noun") that we capitalise, not names in general; pneumonia is a name of a condition in the same way that dog is the name of an animal, but they are not proper names. So there's no reason to capitalise: no rule requires it.
Put another way, names for types of things don't take capitals, but the names for specific examples of the thing generally do. So dog is a name of a type of thing, Fido is the name of a specific instance of the thing.
|
|
|
Post by Twoddle on Aug 17, 2009 21:35:54 GMT
It's a funny language, isn't it? The "rule" says to capitalise only proper nouns and words that start sentences. But then there are also adjectives that describe nationalities (American, Australian), some acronyms that are capitalised throughout (NATO); and the first-person-singular personal-pronoun, "I".
Ah, and the trendy camel-case (iTunes) which appears to break all the rules it can. Coach and horses job, that one.
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Aug 18, 2009 21:14:05 GMT
It's a funny language, isn't it? The "rule" says to capitalise only proper nouns and words that start sentences. But then there are also adjectives that describe nationalities (American, Australian), some acronyms that are capitalised throughout (NATO); and the first-person-singular personal-pronoun, "I". Ah, and the trendy camel-case (iTunes) which appears to break all the rules it can. Coach and horses job, that one. BlackBerry?
|
|
|
Post by Verbivore on Jan 26, 2019 1:18:54 GMT
I've just now removed a post from some "guest" trying to flog Viagra on this long-dormant thread.
On the topic of camel-case trade names, as in the given example BlackBerry: Trademark registration is sometimes difficult (or just not allowed) when one tries to trademark what is otherwise a common noun. Blackberry growers are likely to have objected to the trademarking (and hence "locking") of that fruit's common name, but BlackBerry (initial and camel-case caps) is not seen by the authorities as the same thing. Likewise Apple, with a capital, isn't just a Jonathon or Granny Smith fruit, but a trademarked name. As for the proliferation of camel-case iThings … I suppose we can blame the late Steve Jobs for that. It seems silly by standard orthography / grammar, but it has made a lot of money for the company. "Apple phone" just doesn't have the same, er, ring to it as iPhone.
Posted by a user of BlackBerry phones and Macintosh computers, Macintosh being another type of apple – allegedly Jobs's favourite variety. Perhaps I'm a tad fruity. ;-)
I don't expect any rush to trademark Lemon for a product name (though I've owned a few cars that could be so described).
|
|
|
Post by Twoddle on Feb 1, 2019 23:32:40 GMT
Posted by a user of BlackBerry phones … . The Contessa uses a BlackBerry Priv because it has a physical keyboard and, by some quirk of nature, her fingers have trouble communicating with a virtual keyboard. I can't stand the damned thing: it's highly counter intuitive, albeit it does sport an excellent 18 Megapixel camera and it takes SD cards to expand its memory. I used to moan vociferously about camel case, until it occurred to me that my Scottish surname employs exactly the same principle, so nowadays I remain silent on the subject.
|
|
|
Post by Verbivore on Feb 2, 2019 0:26:19 GMT
Posted by a user of BlackBerry phones … . The Contessa uses a BlackBerry Priv because it has a physical keyboard and, by some quirk of nature, her fingers have trouble communicating with a virtual keyboard. I can't stand the damned thing: it's highly counter intuitive, albeit it does sport an excellent 18 Megapixel camera and it takes SD cards to expand its memory. I used to moan vociferously about camel case, until it occurred to me that my Scottish surname employs exactly the same principle, so nowadays I remain silent on the subject. My main reason for using BlackBerry is its "security" – everything is fully encrypted by default. My BB Passport uses BlackBerry's proprietary operating system, so no risks such as with Android. I also prefer physical keyboards. As it was sold on a model runout just days before its discontinuation, I paid $187 for a $2,000 phone.
|
|
|
Post by Twoddle on Feb 2, 2019 9:24:26 GMT
As it was sold on a model runout just days before its discontinuation, I paid $187 for a $2,000 phone. Any chance you could get me an iPhone X for twenty quid?
|
|
|
Post by Verbivore on Feb 8, 2019 1:41:25 GMT
As it was sold on a model runout just days before its discontinuation, I paid $187 for a $2,000 phone. Any chance you could get me an iPhone X for twenty quid?
|
|