[Leica] Forte and Forte: Was, Even us natives don't write English good"

[jls at runbox.com (Jeffery Smith)]

Complementary refers to different things working together because each
lacks what the other has. One could say that his 35mm lens complements
his 90mm lens because the two have different roles both of which are
necessary to him. In DNA, one half-strand acts as a template for the
other half-strand. The two half strands are completely non-identical,
but one acts like a template for making the other much like a negative
acts like a template for making a positive.

When someone says that my silver Nokton complements my olive body R2, it
might mean that the two dissimilar pieces look good together (like a
blue sport coat complements tan slacks). But saying that a silver Nokton
compliments an olive R2 implies that the Nokton is telling the R2 "Hey,
you're lookin' good!"

Jeffery Smith
New Orleans, LA


-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+jls=runbox.com@leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+jls=runbox.com@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of animal
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 4:36 PM
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: Re: [Leica] Forte and Forte: Was,Even us natives don't write
English good"

Now you have me confused i do know what complementary means but have no
clue
what one word you mean.
Would you explain?
Simon Jessurun
amsterdam
the netherlands
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jeffery Smith" <jls@runbox.com>
To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 11:13 PM
Subject: RE: [Leica] Forte and Forte: Was,Even us natives don't write
English good"


> Which is what I indicated earlier...if people do it incorrectly long
> enough, then the norm becomes the rule even if it is incorrect. And
I'm
> not using "old printed dictionaries". I learned it correctly 40 years
> ago.
>
> But I am a conservative in language, and would like things to remain
as
> they were, not as they are mispronounced. I even shun removing the
final
> comma from phrases such as "Larry, Moe, and Curly" as deleting that
> second comma always means that I have to go back and reread the
sentence
> again.
>
> I suppose that, before I expire, I will be reading about complimentary
> DNA. I suppose that means that adenine and guanine will be saying nice
> things about thymine and cytosine, or that you can have the DNA free,
> compliments of the house. But as long as people don't know what
> complementary means, I guess we should go with the one word they do
> understand.
>
> Jeffery Smith
> New Orleans, LA
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lug-bounces+jls=runbox.com@leica-users.org
> [mailto:lug-bounces+jls=runbox.com@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of
> Jonathan Borden
> Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 3:59 PM
> To: Leica Users Group
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Forte and Forte: Was,Even us natives don't write
> English good"
>
>
> Marc James Small wrote:
>
> > At 12:57 PM 5/9/04 -0500, Jeffery Smith wrote:
> >> I'm more comfortable with the music version pronunciation. If I say
> >> "fort", someone invariably corrects me.
> >>
> >
> > These are two different words, though both descend from the Latin
root
> > "forti" meaning strong or forceful.
> >
> > One word comes through the Italian and means "with great force";  it
> is
> > used as a musical directive and is pronounced "for-tey" in USian
> > English.
> >
> > The other comes through Medi?val French and is a survival of the
> > earlier
> > "campus forte" or "situs forte", both meaning a fortified location.
> > Our
> > Modern English word "fort" derives from this word.  And, yes, when
> > "forte"
> > is used to describe an outstanding quality or a strong
qualification,
> > it is
> > pronounced, "fort" in Modern English.
>
>
> In Modern American English, at least among the people I hang around
> with, an outstanding quality or strong qualification is referred to as
> a "forte" and pronounced "fort-ay"
>
> Let's see, searching Wordnet we get:
> http://www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn?stage=1&word=forte
>
> >
> > Check out any decent dictionary, from the modern versions of Webster
> > or the
> > American Heritage Dictionary or, of course, the Oxford English
> > Dictionary.
>
> The way folks speak in Princeton N.J. is fine by me. I hark from the
> parts William Webster harks from, and if he were alive today I'm sure
> he'd be using this sense of the term "forte".
>
> In any case any linguist worth his or her salt would accept that when
> common usage in a community differs from some 'old printed dictionary,
> that its time to update the dictionary. Language is alive, and changes
> with time.
>
> Now let's look at what the American Heritage Dictionary says ... I
> found this:
>
> http://www.bartleby.com/64/C007/086.html
>
> >
> > So, Jefferey, allow them to correct you.  Then you can correct THEM.
>
> Well you can correct, but that would be contrary to the most common
> usage by contemporary Americans. Since the reason we have language is
> to communicate, I think its best to pronounce things the way they make
> the most sense to the most people. see
> http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forte On the other hand:
> http://www.vocabula.com/archives/VRJune00.htm
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information

_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information