[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ubl] Specialised vs. specialized
Yes, And we use Ya'll and ain't very commonly in the Southern U.S. However, common use is not the deciding factor. The fact is that we adopted the OED as the authoritative source. -------------------------- Marion A. Royal U.S. General Services Administration 202.208.4643 (Office) 202.302.4634 (Mobile) Sent from PDA - Please excuse fat thumbs. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim McGrath" [firstname.lastname@example.org] Sent: 04/14/2004 11:46 PM To: email@example.com Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: [ubl] Specialised vs. specialized my New Oxford Dictionary of English also gives preference to the "ize" spelling. so the academics think we should use "ize". but i did a quick search of the English Daily Telegraph newspaper and found.. specialise in 178 articles specialize in none customise in 383 articles customize in none. - so we have common usage indicator that is different. i suspect this will apply to most "ize" versus "ise" spellings - so lets leave it as is (using "ise" in all cases) email@example.com wrote: >[firstname.lastname@example.org:] > >| Unless someone can find me a British authority of equal weight to >| the contrary (and no, I don't count something like Chambers as >| equal to the OED), I'm going to have to change this. > >I just found an authority of equal weight: the Compact OED, which >lists "specialised" as an acceptable alternative. Not preferred, >mind you, but OK. > >So I'll let our UBL TC members representing the British >Commonwealth call it: what shall it be, Specialised or >Specialized? Deadline for replies is noon San Francisco time >tomorrow (Thursday), 'cause that's when I start the next build. > >Jon > > Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 17:48:55 -0700 (PDT) > From: email@example.com > > Folks, > > I've just made a truly sad discovery: a usage I thought was > preferred British is not. We decided a while ago to use Oxford > English, and that means the Oxford English Dictionary. I thought > up till now that Oxford English meant "specialised" rather than > "specialized." But on checking I have just discovered that not > only does the OED prefer "ize" to "ise" *in general*, but it does > not even have an entry for "specialised." And if it ain't in the > OED, it ain't English no matter where you live. (The form with > the s does appear in some of the historical citations, but unlike > "despatch," it doesn't rate a listing as a recognized alternative. > Same with "customise," which doesn't even appear in citations.) > > Unless someone can find me a British authority of equal weight to > the contrary (and no, I don't count something like Chambers as > equal to the OED), I'm going to have to change this. > > Fortunately this will be a fairly straightforward task in the > master document text, the file names, and the schemas, and I'm up > to doing it for the build due out Friday night. But it will > also require changes in the following two illustrations, for which > I do not have the original art: > > Figure 2 > Figure B-5 > > Jon > > > > >To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ubl/members/leave_workgroup.php. > > > -- regards tim mcgrath phone: +618 93352228 postal: po box 1289 fremantle western australia 6160 To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ubl/members/leave_workgroup.php.