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

[jls at runbox.com (Jeffery Smith)]

They know what "complimentary" means, so they use it for both
complimentary AND complementary. I have to admit that I didn't use or
understand the term complementary until I learned about DNA replication
back in the 1960's.

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 4:54 PM
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: Re: [Leica] Forte and Forte: Was,Even us natives don't write
English good"

help
<snip>
But as long as people don't know what
> complementary means, I guess we should go with the one word they do
> understand.
<snip>
What " one word they do understand " do you mean here?
Thats what i ment
simon

---- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jeffery Smith" <jls@runbox.com>
To: "'Leica Users Group'" <lug@leica-users.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 11:44 PM
Subject: RE: [Leica] Forte and Forte: Was,Even us natives don't write
English good"


> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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