Too little too late

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Sat Jul 10, 2004 2:50 pm

Received Friday (July 9):

Earl · **Posted:** Sat Jul 10, 2004 3:53 pm

Or four years too early...

juliette14 · **Posted:** Sat Jul 10, 2004 6:28 pm

Hmmm. From http://theslot.blogspot.com:If you'll be in the D.C. area on Saturday, July 24, join me at 1 p.m. at Politics & Prose in Northwest Washington, where I'll be signing copies of "The Elephants of Style."

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Sat Jul 10, 2004 10:42 pm

Walsh e-mailed:You may have received a postcard telling you I'll be
signing my book at Politics & Prose in March. March??
They would have to screw that up for a copy editor's
event, wouldn't they?
The event will actually be Saturday, July 24, at 1
p.m.Also, note that his book gets a mention in William Safire's On Language column this week.Incidentally, I'm with Safire on "gender" and "media," but, then, I didn't write a book, nor do I have a column in a widely read magazine.

SusanV · **Posted:** Sun Jul 11, 2004 11:34 am

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:

Incidentally, I'm with Safire on "gender" and "media," but, then, I didn't write a book, nor do I have a column in a widely read magazine.<hr></blockquote>Me, too, but I fear we are the last of a dying breed.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Sat Jul 24, 2004 11:01 pm

For the record, Walsh's book-signing today in Washington went well. Here, he exclaims, "Stop using Web site as one word!"

nstockdale · **Posted:** Sat Jul 24, 2004 11:57 pm

I love it. Say it with meaning, Bill!

majorbabs · **Posted:** Sun Jul 25, 2004 12:54 pm

Bill will have to explain to me why website as two words is preferable to website as one word. I don't get it.

Bumfketeer · **Posted:** Sun Jul 25, 2004 3:45 pm

Darn. I was hoping he was saying "Host is NOT a verb....ever!!!"

Oeditpus Rex · **Posted:** Sun Jul 25, 2004 8:29 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by majorbabs:
Bill will have to explain to me why website as two words is preferable to website as one word. I don't get it.<hr></blockquote>Because "Web" is a short form of "World Wide Web," which is a trademark of the World Wide Web Consortium and as such should be up. You wouldn't write "Fordtruck," would you?That said, in many cases the second element of a compound word loses its phonetic signature. "Website" makes me blink, as it looks as if it could be pronounced "web-sih-TAY."

ADKbrown · **Posted:** Mon Jul 26, 2004 9:56 am

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Oeditpus Rex:
Because "Web" is a short form of "World Wide Web," which is a trademark of the World Wide Web Consortium and as such should be up. You wouldn't write "Fordtruck," would you?<hr></blockquote>No, but I think it is just a matter of time before "website" becomes the standard spelling. Most people don't know that "Web" is short for "World Wide Web," so they see no reason to uppercase it.

majorbabs · **Posted:** Mon Jul 26, 2004 10:21 am

My two cents. I happen to think website is a much more user-friendly term than Web site, and one that's more communicative to web users. The use of World Wide Web has passed from most people's vocabularies, just as radar and snafu have passed from being acronyms to real words.
Why continue an out-of-date etymological relationship?

jjmoney62 · **Posted:** Mon Jul 26, 2004 12:37 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by majorbabs:
Why continue an out-of-date etymological relationship?<hr></blockquote>I've asked myself that many times over the years.

Oeditpus Rex · **Posted:** Mon Jul 26, 2004 1:04 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by majorbabs:
Why continue an out-of-date etymological relationship?<hr></blockquote>Why not just change the entire language to accommodate laziness and ignorance? (You can call it "evolution" if you want, but I refuse to apply that term to the disregard for accuracy.)

secretsquirrel · **Posted:** Mon Jul 26, 2004 2:43 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by majorbabs:
Why continue an out-of-date etymological relationship?<hr></blockquote>I recently ended an out-of-date entomological relationship. What an insect.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Mon Jul 26, 2004 2:45 pm

All right, all right.

Matthew Grieco · **Posted:** Mon Jul 26, 2004 2:57 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Oeditpus Rex:
Why not just change the entire language to accommodate laziness and ignorance? (You can call it "evolution" if you want, but I refuse to apply that term to the disregard for accuracy.)<hr></blockquote>But under that reasoning, wouldn't many compound words date back to laziness and ignorance? As long as there's a good reason underlying the evolution, evolution it is. Without it, this would be the news-paper business.I'm on the fence when it comes to "Web site" and "website," I admit. But the latter feels inevitable and ascendant, and it's at least as intelligible, so that seems like evolution to me.

wirefly · **Joined:** Fri Jul 23, 2004 12:01 am **Posts:** 12

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Matthew Grieco:
I'm on the fence when it comes to "Web site" and "website," I admit. But the latter feels inevitable and ascendant, and it's at least as intelligible, so that seems like evolution to me.<hr></blockquote>I don't know if we're taking a vote, but I agree that "website" seems inevitable, though as a long-time (and often lone) defender of "Web site" in our publications department, I feel almost hypocritical for saying so. Perhaps it's time to let this one go; "website" is becoming so common now that the capitalized, two-word version is starting to look incorrect to even me. wirefly

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Mon Jul 26, 2004 4:16 pm

Anyhow, it was nice that Bill Walsh's book-signing went well.

Testy Copy Editors

Too little too late

Who is online

What They're Saying

Useful Links