Re: "role" vs. "r\^ole"

Re: "role" vs. "r\^ole"

[Toby Bartels]

Michael Barr wrote in part:

>Another affectation is using "topoi" as the plural of topos.  If
>you insist on that, you should use the genetive of "of topos" and the
>accusative when it is the direct object--not to mention the vocative when
>addressing a topos.

That's not really fair; there's a long history in English,
when adopting a foreign noun, of adopting the foreign plural as well
(then switching to an "-s" plural when the noun becomes less foreign,
 or occasionally using the plural form only as a collective noun).
However, this practice uses only one case, usually nominative.

So by saying "topoi", one pretends that "topos" is a real Greek word
(in this sense) and that it's still a foreign word with a foreign plural.
This pretence is an affectation, certainly, but it is complete in itself.


--Toby

Re: "role" vs. "r\^ole"

[David Yetter]

Perhaps all the categorists who insist on toposes instead of topoi will
teach their
lower division students about coordinate axises and look forward to
greeting them when they
return to the university as alumnuses?  (Naturally if they do this they
will omit the diaresis from the
second o in coordinate.)

(Sorry to be contrarian, but I've always been fond of the Greek plural,
and the
diaresis on the o in co\"{o}rdinate.)

Best Thoughts,
David Y.


On 10 Oct 2007, at 22:04, Robert L Knighten wrote:

> Steve Vickers writes:
>>
>> Returning to category theory, and topos theory in particular, I can't
>> resist also quoting his guidance on Latin plurals (which surely must
>> apply even more to Greek): "All that can be safely said [regarding
>> whether to prefer or avoid the Latin form] is that there is a tendency
>> to abandon the Latin plurals, and that, when one is really in doubt
>> which to use, the English form should be given the preference."
>>
>
> Having looked at both a few authorities and some publications outside
> of
> category theory where the word is used, I am curious if there is any
> field
> other than category theory where the plural of topos is not topoi?
>
> -- Bob
>
> --
> Robert L. Knighten
> RLK@knighten.org
>

Re: "role" vs. "r\^ole"

[Fred E.J. Linton]

Some examples in support of what Toby Bartels 
<toby+spam@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:

> ... there's a long history in English,
> when adopting a foreign noun, of adopting the foreign plural as well ...

Examples: alumni and alumnae, not alumnuses; simplices, not simplexes; 
vertices, not vertexes; phenomena, not phenomenons; data, not datums.

[Not that there aren't counterexamples, too.]

-- Fred

Re: "role" vs. "r\^ole"

[Mikael Vejdemo Johansson]

[Note from moderator: this may be a good note on which to close this
thread.]

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007, Vaughan Pratt wrote:
> Michael Barr wrote:
>>  Another affectation is using "topoi" as the plural of topos.  If
>>  you insist on that, you should use the genetive of "of topos" and the
>>  accusative when it is the direct object--not to mention the vocative when
>>  addressing a topos.
>
> What a great idea.  You may have started a movement here.
>
> Topos: omicron declension (second)
>
> .   Singular (one) Dual (two)   Plural (many)
> Nom    topos       topo         topoi
> Gen    topou       topoin       topon
> Dat    topoi       topoin       topois
> Acc    topon       topo         topous
> Voc    tope        topo         topoi
>
> (Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greek_grammar )
>
> Be careful when addressing two topo after dinner---if you hail them as
> topoi they may think you've had one too many.  On a related note, anyone
> know whether topos is masculine or feminine?  Ignorance there could get
> you off to a bad start with two topoin.
>

Now, now, if we're really embracing the ancient grammar to this extent,
then we should drop the prepositions that english uses to accomodate the
same semantic space that once was handled by cases. Thus, I would rewrite
the above as

"Ignorance there could get you off to a bad start topoin."

And of course, once we enter this course, what's more natural than letting
old english, and even old norse guide our cases throughout?

-- 
Mikael Vejdemo Johansson |  To see the world in a grain of sand
mik@math.su.se           |   And heaven in a wild flower
                          |  To hold infinity in the palm of your hand
                          |   And eternity for an hour

Re: "role" vs. "r\^ole"

[Fred E.J. Linton]

Steve Vickers, aka s.j.vickers@cs.bham.ac.uk , notes

> Fowler (I have the 1965 edition) says, "there being no other word 'role'
> from which it has to be kept distinct, both the italics and the accent
> might well be abandoned."

Same words almost exactly, but for the "and" above taking the form of an "&",

in my 1952 reprint of the 1937 (twice corrected) version of the 1911 edition.

Fowler takes a dim view of -- one might even say, rails against -- the 
use of French words in English: his article "French words" begins,

"Display of superior knowledge is as great a vulgarity as display of
superior wealth -- greater, indeed, inasmuch as knowledge should tend 
more definitely than wealth towards discretion & good manners."

Salut :-) ,

-- Fred

Re: "role" vs. "r\^ole"

[Robert L Knighten]

Steve Vickers writes:
 >
 > Returning to category theory, and topos theory in particular, I can't
 > resist also quoting his guidance on Latin plurals (which surely must
 > apply even more to Greek): "All that can be safely said [regarding
 > whether to prefer or avoid the Latin form] is that there is a tendency
 > to abandon the Latin plurals, and that, when one is really in doubt
 > which to use, the English form should be given the preference."
 >

Having looked at both a few authorities and some publications outside of
category theory where the word is used, I am curious if there is any field
other than category theory where the plural of topos is not topoi?

-- Bob

-- 
Robert L. Knighten
RLK@knighten.org

Re: "role" vs. "r\^ole"

[Vaughan Pratt]

Michael Barr wrote:
> Another affectation is using "topoi" as the plural of topos.  If
> you insist on that, you should use the genetive of "of topos" and the
> accusative when it is the direct object--not to mention the vocative when
> addressing a topos.

What a great idea.  You may have started a movement here.

Topos: omicron declension (second)

.   Singular (one) Dual (two)   Plural (many)
Nom    topos       topo         topoi
Gen    topou       topoin       topon
Dat    topoi       topoin       topois
Acc    topon       topo         topous
Voc    tope        topo         topoi

(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Greek_grammar )

Be careful when addressing two topo after dinner---if you hail them as
topoi they may think you've had one too many.  On a related note, anyone
know whether topos is masculine or feminine?  Ignorance there could get
you off to a bad start with two topoin.

Vaughan

Re: "role" vs. "r\^ole"

[Steve Vickers]

Dear Peter,

Fowler (I have the 1965 edition) says, "there being no other word 'role'
from which it has to be kept distinct, both the italics and the accent
might well be abandoned."

He also refers (under an article on 'morale') to the "sanctity of the
French form". The word comes from French, and French gives it the
accent, and some like to display their knowledge of this fact. But
Fowler's argument is that English is not obliged to keep the French form.

Returning to category theory, and topos theory in particular, I can't
resist also quoting his guidance on Latin plurals (which surely must
apply even more to Greek): "All that can be safely said [regarding
whether to prefer or avoid the Latin form] is that there is a tendency
to abandon the Latin plurals, and that, when one is really in doubt
which to use, the English form should be given the preference."

Regards,

Steve.

Peter Selinger wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> here is a frivolous question only tangentially related to category
> theory.
>
> Does anyone know why it is common, in papers on logic, semantics, and
> category theory, to spell the word "role" the French way, i.e., with a
> circumflex accent? I am taking about the idiom "to play a role", as
> in, "in this definition, x and y play symmetric r\^oles". Sometimes it
> is also used as in "the r\^ole of x is ...".
>
> As far as I can tell, the accented spelling is a strange ideosyncrasy,
> given that the word "role", without the accent, is a perfectly
> acceptable, and very common, English word. Here are some examples I
> collected a few years ago:
>
> How big a role did politics play? -Los Angeles Times, March 27, 2002
> Huge bomb could play role in Iraq. -The Guardian, March 13, 2003
> Australia intends to play a role in [...] Iraq, The Australian, 4/15/2003
> A movie in which Nicole Kidman could play the lead role -Business Times, 1/16/3
> Genetics play a big role in your health. -Citizen-Times.com, April 11, 2003
> Linux prepares to play broader role in embedded systems. -EETimes, 6/11/2001
> The UN would play a central role in running the country. -Guardian, 4/10/2003
> His role is to lead the paddlers through the race -Waterfront News, Oct 2007
> How oil plays a role in an invasion of Iraq. -YellowTimes.org, Jan 22, 2003
>
> I realize that Merriam Webster's Dictionary allows "r\^ole" as an
> alternate spelling (the Oxford English Dictionary does not, as far as
> I can see online). However, I have never seen it spelled with the
> circumflex accent anywhere outside of mathematics.
>
> So why is it that so many mathematical authors spell it that way? One
> explanation would be that the authors are French; however, this does
> not seem to be empirically true. I have most often seen the spelling
> used by non-French authors. Another possible explanation is that the
> word "r\^ole" has a technical meaning that differentiates it from
> "role". However, I can't imagine what it would be.
>
> Maybe this habit has been passed on for generations. Can it perhaps be
> traced back to a misspelling in some influential article?
>
> -- Peter
>
>

Re: "role" vs. "r\^ole"

[Dusko Pavlovic]

yes, that is an interesting question. in fact, i have a similar question
about the words star and dagger. although they are perfectly acceptable
english words on their own, in the context of categories we write
*-autonomous and %-compact, even in the titles, where star-autonomous and
dagger-compact would say the same, just look easier to pronounce.

but then again, with my name and surname gaining and losing accents as i
go, maybe i should not ask such questions.

-- du$ko

On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, Peter Selinger wrote:

> Hi everybody,
>
> here is a frivolous question only tangentially related to category
> theory.
>
> Does anyone know why it is common, in papers on logic, semantics, and
> category theory, to spell the word "role" the French way, i.e., with a
> circumflex accent? I am taking about the idiom "to play a role", as
> in, "in this definition, x and y play symmetric r\^oles". Sometimes it
> is also used as in "the r\^ole of x is ...".
>
> As far as I can tell, the accented spelling is a strange ideosyncrasy,
> given that the word "role", without the accent, is a perfectly
> acceptable, and very common, English word. Here are some examples I
> collected a few years ago:
>
> How big a role did politics play? -Los Angeles Times, March 27, 2002
> Huge bomb could play role in Iraq. -The Guardian, March 13, 2003
> Australia intends to play a role in [...] Iraq, The Australian, 4/15/2003
> A movie in which Nicole Kidman could play the lead role -Business Times, 1/16/3
> Genetics play a big role in your health. -Citizen-Times.com, April 11, 2003
> Linux prepares to play broader role in embedded systems. -EETimes, 6/11/2001
> The UN would play a central role in running the country. -Guardian, 4/10/2003
> His role is to lead the paddlers through the race -Waterfront News, Oct 2007
> How oil plays a role in an invasion of Iraq. -YellowTimes.org, Jan 22, 2003
>
> I realize that Merriam Webster's Dictionary allows "r\^ole" as an
> alternate spelling (the Oxford English Dictionary does not, as far as
> I can see online). However, I have never seen it spelled with the
> circumflex accent anywhere outside of mathematics.
>
> So why is it that so many mathematical authors spell it that way? One
> explanation would be that the authors are French; however, this does
> not seem to be empirically true. I have most often seen the spelling
> used by non-French authors. Another possible explanation is that the
> word "r\^ole" has a technical meaning that differentiates it from
> "role". However, I can't imagine what it would be.
>
> Maybe this habit has been passed on for generations. Can it perhaps be
> traced back to a misspelling in some influential article?
>
> -- Peter
>
>
>

Re: "role" vs. "r\^ole"

[Ross Street]

Dear Peter

With questions like this, we naturally miss Max's expertise.
Allow me a few ramblings. While you did take a nice sample of
examples from different English speaking countries, they were
all from newspapers. In Australia, newspapers have long used
the American spellings; they used color, labor, . . . long before
other Australians. I found this strange as a kid. In fact, I believe
my old Collins Australian Dictionary would have given "r\^ole".
The Macquarie Dictionary gives "r\^ole" as a second usage as
American influences are growing.

The English word, as we know, comes from the French "r\^ole" for roll
of paper on which an actor's part was written. It was quite legitimate
for Webster to pin down American spelling before it had stabilized in  
England
and before the fashion in England favoured the French spellings
such as "programme". I suspect that "r\^ole" was part of that revision.
(Funnily, the French at the same time favoured English words and
names such as Edith.)

So I don't think it is in mathematics especially, except that we are  
a bit
conservative when it comes to language. "Shew" was in my mathematics
text books as an undergraduate, and not in any other texts.

The typewriter, computer and mobile/cellular phone have also helped
eliminate accents (and, unfortunately, apostrophes).  Who wants
to look at <r\^ole>? Or <ü> or <é> in the way my mailer transforms it to
yours? But I do want to preserve the distinctions:
	between <its> and <it's>,
	<building's>, <buildings>, and <buildings'> .

End of ramble.

Ross

On 10/10/2007, at 7:04 AM, Peter Selinger wrote:

> Does anyone know why it is common, in papers on logic, semantics, and
> category theory, to spell the word "role" the French way, i.e., with a
> circumflex accent? I am taking about the idiom "to play a role", as
> in, "in this definition, x and y play symmetric r\^oles". Sometimes it
> is also used as in "the r\^ole of x is ...".

Re: "role" vs. "r\^ole"

[Fred E.J. Linton]

selinger@mathstat.dal.ca (Peter Selinger) asked:

> Subject: categories: "role" vs. "r\^ole"
>
> Does anyone know why it is common, in papers on logic, semantics, and
> category theory, to spell the word "role" the French way, i.e., with a
> circumflex accent? ...

Fowler, in his <i>Modern English Usage</i>, has this to say
under the heading <b>Role, r&ocirc;le</b>:

"Though the word is etymologically the same as <i>roll</i>, 
meaning the roll of MS. that contained an actor's part,
the differentiation is too useful to be sacrificed by
spelling always <i>roll</i>. But, there being no other
word <i>role</i> from which it has to be kept distinct,
both the italics and the accent might well be abandoned.
As to the sanctity of the French form, see MORALE."
 
And, under <b>Morale</b>, Fowler begins:

"Is a combination of pandantry and Gallicism to bully us
into ... ? ... The right course is to ... abstain from the 
French ... , of which we have no need."

> As far as I can tell, the accented spelling is a strange ideosyncrasy,
> given that the word "role", without the accent, is a perfectly
> acceptable, and very common, English word. 
> ...
> I realize that Merriam Webster's Dictionary allows "r\^ole" as an
> alternate spelling (the Oxford English Dictionary does not, as far as
> I can see online). 
> ...
> Maybe this habit has been passed on for generations. Can it perhaps be
> traced back to a misspelling in some influential article?

Fowler would call it another result of "pedantry with French words."

Re: "role" vs. "r\^ole"

[Michael Barr]

It is, IMHO, a pure affectation.  There are a few, very few, English works
that might be improved with an accent (e.g the name "Andre", words like
"preempt" and a handful of others), but "role" is certainly not one of
them.  Another affectation is using "topoi" as the plural of topos.  If
you insist on that, you should use the genetive of "of topos" and the
accusative when it is the direct object--not to mention the vocative when
addressing a topos.

Michael

On Tue, 9 Oct 2007, Peter Selinger wrote:

> Hi everybody,
>
> here is a frivolous question only tangentially related to category
> theory.
>
> Does anyone know why it is common, in papers on logic, semantics, and
> category theory, to spell the word "role" the French way, i.e., with a
> circumflex accent? I am taking about the idiom "to play a role", as
> in, "in this definition, x and y play symmetric r\^oles". Sometimes it
> is also used as in "the r\^ole of x is ...".
>
> As far as I can tell, the accented spelling is a strange ideosyncrasy,
> given that the word "role", without the accent, is a perfectly
> acceptable, and very common, English word. Here are some examples I
> collected a few years ago:
>
> How big a role did politics play? -Los Angeles Times, March 27, 2002
> Huge bomb could play role in Iraq. -The Guardian, March 13, 2003
> Australia intends to play a role in [...] Iraq, The Australian, 4/15/2003
> A movie in which Nicole Kidman could play the lead role -Business Times, 1/16/3
> Genetics play a big role in your health. -Citizen-Times.com, April 11, 2003
> Linux prepares to play broader role in embedded systems. -EETimes, 6/11/2001
> The UN would play a central role in running the country. -Guardian, 4/10/2003
> His role is to lead the paddlers through the race -Waterfront News, Oct 2007
> How oil plays a role in an invasion of Iraq. -YellowTimes.org, Jan 22, 2003
>
> I realize that Merriam Webster's Dictionary allows "r\^ole" as an
> alternate spelling (the Oxford English Dictionary does not, as far as
> I can see online). However, I have never seen it spelled with the
> circumflex accent anywhere outside of mathematics.
>
> So why is it that so many mathematical authors spell it that way? One
> explanation would be that the authors are French; however, this does
> not seem to be empirically true. I have most often seen the spelling
> used by non-French authors. Another possible explanation is that the
> word "r\^ole" has a technical meaning that differentiates it from
> "role". However, I can't imagine what it would be.
>
> Maybe this habit has been passed on for generations. Can it perhaps be
> traced back to a misspelling in some influential article?
>
> -- Peter
>
>

"role" vs. "r\^ole"

[Peter Selinger]

Hi everybody,

here is a frivolous question only tangentially related to category
theory.

Does anyone know why it is common, in papers on logic, semantics, and
category theory, to spell the word "role" the French way, i.e., with a
circumflex accent? I am taking about the idiom "to play a role", as
in, "in this definition, x and y play symmetric r\^oles". Sometimes it
is also used as in "the r\^ole of x is ...".

As far as I can tell, the accented spelling is a strange ideosyncrasy,
given that the word "role", without the accent, is a perfectly
acceptable, and very common, English word. Here are some examples I
collected a few years ago:

How big a role did politics play? -Los Angeles Times, March 27, 2002
Huge bomb could play role in Iraq. -The Guardian, March 13, 2003
Australia intends to play a role in [...] Iraq, The Australian, 4/15/2003
A movie in which Nicole Kidman could play the lead role -Business Times, 1/16/3
Genetics play a big role in your health. -Citizen-Times.com, April 11, 2003
Linux prepares to play broader role in embedded systems. -EETimes, 6/11/2001
The UN would play a central role in running the country. -Guardian, 4/10/2003
His role is to lead the paddlers through the race -Waterfront News, Oct 2007
How oil plays a role in an invasion of Iraq. -YellowTimes.org, Jan 22, 2003

I realize that Merriam Webster's Dictionary allows "r\^ole" as an
alternate spelling (the Oxford English Dictionary does not, as far as
I can see online). However, I have never seen it spelled with the
circumflex accent anywhere outside of mathematics.

So why is it that so many mathematical authors spell it that way? One
explanation would be that the authors are French; however, this does
not seem to be empirically true. I have most often seen the spelling
used by non-French authors. Another possible explanation is that the
word "r\^ole" has a technical meaning that differentiates it from
"role". However, I can't imagine what it would be.

Maybe this habit has been passed on for generations. Can it perhaps be
traced back to a misspelling in some influential article?

-- Peter