Conference thebay::joyoflex

    "Adequation" seems to mean the same as "adequacy" in that memo, but I'm
    not sure; I'm having difficulty making sense out of it even with that
    substitution.
    
    It seems to say that:
    
    	The flow of products is less important than the flow of
    	information.
    
    but I'm not sure what that means either.

    It means we tell people about products instead of delivering them.

    I decided after reading it a few times that the intended meaning was
    that throughput of products is dependant on data about those products
    being available.  I had a little more context to work with, though.
    
    I might add that the adequation of my understanding is subordinated to
    the availability of background information, indeed I would even assert
    that with confidence.
    
    Ian.

    Then there was the Roman engineering student who made an
    on-site inspection at the resort after learning to design
    water transportation systems.
    
    Aquaduct equation education adequation vacation.

Re: 901.4

After he finished, he was asked to explain, retest, and verify the results. He
found he had made a minor computational mistake, and had to factor in a 
correction.

This resulted in a (take a *deep* breath):

Aquaduct equation education adequation vacation explanation verification
substantiation substitution.

Bruce

    
Re: 4,5

    And even after his attempts to recover from his mistakes he failed, which
    led to:        
    
    The substantiation of immediate termination with the organization
    and resignation from his occupation with no time wasted in the
    personalification replation of his vacated station.  
    
    

the word is aqueduct, not aquaduct.
               ^             ^
Just passin' through, bye now.  :-)

-d

    >the word is aqueduct, not aquaduct.  Just passin' through, bye now.  :-)
    
    Please come back.  My fingers wanted to type aqueduct, but I figured
    that the root must be aqua because of the connection with water.
    So what IS the etymology of aqueduct?
    
    (Please don't tell me to watch it on video.
    We don't have the aqueduct tape.)

    Okay, Norman, you know I can't resist an appeal like that.  :-)
    
    The word aqueduct comes from the Latin nouns aqua/aquae, water, and
    	       _
    ductus/ductus, conduit (this latter from duco/ducere/duci/ductus, to
    lead or carry).  An aqueduct is a conduit of water, hence the genitive
    form, aquae, is the root of the English word.
    
    In modern English (especially the American variant), the ae digraph,
    which I can't type on this Apple IIGS, is often elided into just its e
    component; cf. haemoglobin --> hemoglobin, mediaeval --> medieval, and
    encyclopaedia --> encyclopedia.
    
    Actually, Aqueduct is a horse-racing track...
    
    :-)
    
    -d

                                       -
    Short excursus.  One of many excursus.
    
    �	        _
    �ductus/ductus, conduit (this latter from duco/ducere/duci/ductus, to
    
    Some readers may have missed the disembodied _, or dismissed it as a
    typo; but Dick was, of course, right.  
    
    Some speakers of English, most notably the ones who affect Latinate
    endings for words that would happily take English ones, assume that all
    Latin nouns that end -US take the ending -I in the plural.  This is not
    so; there are many nouns that don't. I'd spell out the rules, but
    they're not immediately relevant, and anyway Dick would do a better job
    of it.
    
    One -US noun that doesn't take -I in the plural, and that - as a parent
    - I keep meeting in a distorted form, is `syllabus'; people who say
    `syllabi' are ignorami (and that last `word' really _was_ a deliberate
    mistake - for anyone who's interested, the plural of `ignoramus' - an
    English noun derived from a Latin verb - is `ignoramuses').
    
    Just thought I'd mention it.
    
    b
    
    
    

		While we are at it:  What is the 
		correct plural of `agenda'?

		Jim

    Agendas. `Agenda' is itself plural, meaning (in English, but literally)
    [a list of] things to be done. I don't know when `agenda' was taken
    into the English language, but there seem to me to be two
    possibilities:
    
    	o	the word was coined in English, an English (singular)
    		noun being formed from a Latin plural (so that `an agendum'
    		would be a very short list for a meeting, containing
    		only AOB)
    
    	o	when the Latin `agenda' was borrowed into English, the
    		borrower wrongly assumed that because - in
    		some Latin source - the word was associated with a
    		singular verb, the word was singular (Latin neuter
    		plurals take singular verbs anyway)
    
    That second possibility strikes me as less likely, but it'd take a
    bit of research to find out the truth.
    
    To lead the rathole a bit further, to a favourite stamping ground
    of mine (does one have to stamp angrily in a stamping ground,
    and can hobby-horses stamp anyway?), there is `referendum'.
    
    I go along with Fowler, as I've said elsewhere; if the word
    can comfortably take an English plural, give it one. But
    I suppose a pedant might argue thus:
    
         Etymologically `referendum' = a matter on which it is necessary 
         to make reference [to some body]; so a referendum should involve
         just one question (e.g., from the last refendum I was involved in,
         `should the UK become a member of the European Economic Community'.
         
         Therefore there is room for four words:
         
         referendum - the posing of one question in one instance
         referendums - the posing of one question in several instances
         referenda - the posing of several questions in one instance
         referendas - the posing of several questions in several instances
         
    The argument is pleasingly symmetrical, but takes no account of the
    real world.  I'm happy with the Fowler approach, and `referendums'.
    
    b

	re .9


>    ductus/ductus, conduit (this latter from duco/ducere/duci/ductus, to
>    lead or carry).  An aqueduct is a conduit of water, hence the genitive
>    form, aquae, is the root of the English word.

	Probably right. Another possibility is that the word 
	came to English via French.

	The French word is aqueduc (without the final T -- no tea
	in the aqueducts here, only water or wine).

	Cheers 
	roger

	re .10


>    - I keep meeting in a distorted form, is `syllabus'; people who say
>    `syllabi' are ignorami (and that last `word' really _was_ a deliberate

	Good to hear that.

	Same goes for the horrible 'foci'. The plural of focus is focus 
	in Latin, NOT foci.
	In English, if I understood your rules correctly, it 
	should be focuses. Am I correct ?

	Cheers
	roger

	re .12

	Agenda could also be feminine singular, as in "agenda res", 
	one thing that has to be done.

    You're all wrong!  "Aqueduct" actually comes from the word "aquaduck." 
    This term first appears in Old English, and represents a borrowing from
    both the Latin ("aqua," water) and the Germanic ("doke," duck).  It
    originally referred to a primitive conduit which farmers used to
    transport their waterfowl to market.  This idea was stolen by the
    Romans, and the term was turned into the folk etymology "aqueduct."  
    Supporting this interpretation is the ancient French term "aquacanard,"
    used at times to describe the same concept.

	-- Cliff

    Re: .13
    
    Despite the staggering scholarship displayed by .16, aqueduct does come
    from Latin; the OED (Oxford English Dictionary, for non-English types)
    so states explicitly, as does Robert Claiborne's _The Roots of
    English_.  The OED does, however, include the following:
    
    cf. Fr. aqueduc
    
    Re: .14
    				      _
    No, the plural of focus is not focus.  Focus is a 2nd-declension
    masculine noun; the complete declension of it is:
    			   _
    nominative	focus	foci
    		   _	   _
    genitive	foci	focorum
    		  _	   _
    dative	foco	focis
    			   _
    accusative	focum	focos
    		   _	   _
    ablative	foco	focis
    
    vocative	foce
    
    Re: .15
    		     _
    Agreed.  Agenda res is valid, although pedantry indicates that the form
    			    _
    would more properly be res agenda.  :-)
    
    -d
    

    There are a few of us "non-English types" who know what the OED is, and
    some of us actually have a copy.  Now if I can just find where I left
    the magnifying glass ...
    
    :-)

    The word 'aqueduct' was formed from three words, 'AQUa', 'Electro',
    and 'DUCT'.  The meaning translated almost straight from the Latin as
    'water electrical lead', and was a primitive medium for high capacity
    electrical current distribution.  The Romans managed to install this
    'cabling' through parts of Italy and France, but because of the
    problems of bridging the English Channel these waterways never
    penetrated as far as the UK.  Electrical appliances to make use of this
    technological masterpiece were sadly not available until after the time
    of Edison (for example the famous Edison Lighthouse), so the Roman
    architects died without seeing their projects come to fruition.
    
    Ian.

    Roger (.14):
    
    `focuses' is not wrong, and I prefer it to `foci' (but then, I prefer
    `appendixes' too, so I'm probably beyond redemption).
    
    Re .15 and Dick's comment:
    
    Yup, `agenda res' slipped my mind. It's all a question of whether
    the -ND- word is a gerund (which, for the uninitiated, is a verbal 
    noun - as in Horace's _Nunc_est_bibendum_ {Now is the time for
    quaffing [so pass the quaff mixture]}) or a gerundive (which is
    a verbal adjective).  Because people say `What's on the agenda?' 
    without reference to any bit of paper, I made the assumption that 
    it'd be a noun.
    
    Re others:
    
    The `duck' derivation is supported by Harpo's miming of `viaduct'
    as `why a duck'.
    
    b

My LAtin master told me that a 'foca' (preobably misspelt here) was a seal whose
habit was to bask in the sun on the beach. He said it was customary for Ancient
Latin teachers to refer to their pupils as 'lazy focas' for this reason.

Richard.

    Wait!  Stop the presses!  Roger (reply .13) was right!  "Aqueduct" is
    actually from the French "aqueduc" -- "aqua duck" is a false etymology. 
    The confusion arises from the long, tortured route that "aqueduct" took to
    get to us.  Suprisingly enough, "aqueduct" has nothing to do with water or
    ducts (or even ducks).  In fact, "aqueduct" was named after a person!  

    Perhaps you've already heard of Roger, Duke of Aquitaine.  Roger inherited
    his medieval duchy at the height of its power.  Like Mad King Ludwig of
    Bavaria, however, Roger wasted his royal treasury building follies -- the
    aqueducts that we see today.  These strange structures were originally
    called "ducs d'Aquitaine," after Roger.  No one knows what they carried --
    waterfowl, electricity, wine, and Perrier have all been suggested.

    The order of the phrase later changed when Roger developed another pet
    project.  Roger had always admired the English, and was particularly
    impressed with the way the English language formed the possesive.  By royal
    decree, Roger changed the way French formed possesives to imitate the
    English.  Thus, "ducs d'Aquitaine" became "Aquitaine's ducs."  Though the
    change did not effect French permanently (except for smmall, isolated
    villages where it it still used), the order stuck for "Aquitaine's ducs." 
    As the phrase became used again and again, it eventually became elided to
    "aqui[...]ducs."  The French Academy -- in a fierce debate -- later changed
    the "i" to "e," whence we get the "aqueduc" of today.  "Aqueduc" was
    borrowed back into English, forming the folk etymology form that we have
    today, "aqueduct."

    Isn't etymology fascinating?

    	-- Cliff

    Dequation:    Takeover of a competent computer or software company.
    
    Adequation:   Refusal to incorporate their techniques.
    
    Dedequation:  Dismissal or alienation of computer or software employees.

    	To correct the spelling in .21, I have just looked up "phoque", the
    modern French word for seal, and the dictionary says it is derived from
    the Latin "phoca", which in turn was derived from Greek.

	re .17

>    English_.  The OED does, however, include the following:
    
>    cf. Fr. aqueduc

  My COD of Etymology even says:

	cf. Fr. aqueduc (aqueduct XVI), perhaps the immediate source.

  
    				      _
>    No, the plural of focus is not focus.  Focus is a 2nd-declension
>    masculine noun.


   Having checked my Latin dictionary (which I should have done before 
   bringing this up) I must say that you're right on this. Foci is indeed 
   the correct Latin nom. plural. 
   In English, Harrap's admits both foci and focuses.


   Cheers,
   roger