cutting a cheque (check)
howard richler
senses of the verb 'to cut.' A corespondent of mine says that durung
WW2 the US Army used the phrase 'cut an order.' Does anybody have any
information on the orgin of the expression 'cutting a cheque (check)?
Maria Conlon
No, but my personal theory is that "cutting" a cheque/check refers to
the action of removing the check from the checkbook. There must have
been a time when perforations hadn't yet been invented, or when the
invented perforations were imperfect, and removing the check without
tearing another one required scissors.
Well, it's only a theory.
By the way, I think that the phrase is more associated with business use
than with personal. And it is less common here (southeast Michigan, USA)
these days than it was when I first entered the work force in 1960.
Does anyone know if "cut" a cheque/check is used in accounting schools?
And, is it likely a dying usage, at least in some areas of the globe?
Maria Conlon
If all is not lost, where is it?
Martin Ambuhl
> The OED Online doesn't list the sense of 'cutting a cheque' in its 65
> senses of the verb 'to cut.' A corespondent of mine says that durung
^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^
Typing quickly today, aren't you?
> WW2 the US Army used the phrase 'cut an order.' Does anybody have any
> information on the orgin of the expression 'cutting a cheque (check)?
Consider this citation from the OED, s.v. cheque
†1. The counterfoil of a bank bill, draft, etc. Obs.
1706 Act 5 Anne c. 13 [Enacts that Exchequer Bills be made henceforth
with two counterfoils instead of one, and] That the said
Governor and Company [of Bk. of Eng.] shall .. have the use and
custody of the one part of all and euery the Checques, Indents,
or Counterfoyls of all such Exchequer Bills .. and from which
the same Exchequer Bills shall be cut.
That seems to fairly well sum it up. The use of the counterfoil is also
the origin of the word "cheque" for this instrument.
Areff
> howard richler wrote:
>> The OED Online doesn't list the sense of 'cutting a cheque' in its 65
>> senses of the verb 'to cut.' A corespondent of mine says that durung
>> WW2 the US Army used the phrase 'cut an order.' Does anybody have any
>> information on the orgin of the expression 'cutting a cheque (check)?
>
> No, but my personal theory is that "cutting" a cheque/check refers to
> the action of removing the check from the checkbook. There must have
> been a time when perforations hadn't yet been invented, or when the
> invented perforations were imperfect, and removing the check without
> tearing another one required scissors.
>
> Well, it's only a theory.
>
> By the way, I think that the phrase is more associated with business use
> than with personal. And it is less common here (southeast Michigan, USA)
> these days than it was when I first entered the work force in 1960.
That last comment is quite useful. Zimms might have better luck, but I
couldn't find a usage of "cut a check" older than a 1981 Bill Safire "On
Language" column, which sort of lumps it in with "cut a deal" and "cut a
record".
I think the usage is entirely limited to business, isn't it? "Cutting a
check" is what a company's accounts somethingable department does when it
issues a check, as for example a check to reimburse an employee for
business expenses. A paycheck of an ordinary sort is not something that
is "cut", IME. A person "writes a check" or "writes out a check" or
"makes out a check".
> Does anyone know if "cut" a cheque/check is used in accounting schools?
> And, is it likely a dying usage, at least in some areas of the globe?
In my experience it's quite alive as workplacese. I think of it as sort
of suggesting the process of mechanically printing a special sort of check
(I wouldn't expect a business that just writes such checks by hand to use
the "cut" expression). I would guess that it's in greater use in larger
organizations than in smaller ones.
--
Skitt
The "cutting orders" in the US Army comes from the "cut" definition of "type
on a stencil", given in MWCD10. In my day I have typed on (cut) many such
stencils to be used for mimeographing orders.
I don't know about cutting checks, though. I have never cut one of those,
but I have heard about such things.
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/
Al in Dallas
Beginning in the summer of 1980, I worked in the accounting
department of a small construction company. I wrote an accounts
payable program which printed out checks. While I was employed
there, the company hired ADP to process their payroll checks. The
point is that before these two changes were made, all checks[1]
issued by this company were cut by the owner's aunt (and
executive secretary). She had a machine with eight or nine levers
for setting the amount. She pulled on a handle (not unlike a non-
electric adding machine's or cash register's crank), and the
amount was embossed onto the check. I believe if you held one of
these checks up to the light, you'd see the holes that were
perforated as part of the embossed digits.
obRey: Each month, the operator of my program had to enter the
amount to pay each vendor. On my boss's orders, "fuck em" and
"screw em" were legitimate amounts, resulting in no check being
printed[2] for that vendor during that check run. Of course, the
operator could achieve the same result by enter "0" (the digit
zero) in the amount field, but my thirty-something (old to me at
the time) boss really wanted to be able to use the other method.
[1] OT: When the executive secretary cut the paychecks, everyone
got paid each Wednesday for all work up to that Wednesday only
excluding that Wednesday's overtime which would be in the next
week's paycheck. After switching to ADP, the distance between the
last day of work being paid in each paycheck grew two or three
times until everyone was being paid on Friday for the work done
through the previous Friday.
[2] I may have that part wrong. It seems he wanted checks for
$0.00 printed out so he could save them in his files as proof that
he had considered what to pay that vendor that month.
--
Al in Dallas
Martin Ambuhl
> That last comment is quite useful. Zimms might have better luck, but I
> couldn't find a usage of "cut a check" older than a 1981 Bill Safire "On
> Language" column, which sort of lumps it in with "cut a deal" and "cut a
> record".
But check my post <2kb4st...@uni-berlin.de> for the 1706 citation
from the OED.
Michael West
> In my experience it's quite alive as workplacese. I think of it as sort
> of suggesting the process of mechanically printing a special sort of check
> (I wouldn't expect a business that just writes such checks by hand to use
> the "cut" expression). I would guess that it's in greater use in larger
> organizations than in smaller ones.
I too associate the term with some sort of
mechanical or electromechanical process
used by business for issuing checks on heavy
perforated paper stock.
In the Army we said "cutting orders", and I
guessed that, too, had something to do with
the mechanical reproduction of multiple copies
of official orders.
--
Michael West
Melbourne, Australia
David Dyer-Bennet
No, but it's a great question.
I have a theory about "cut an order", though -- man US Army orders of
the shortly post-war period, and I think during the war as well, were
reproduced in multiple copies using a mimeograph. And the term for
preparing a stencil for use on a mimeograph is "cutting". So there
might be a connection there.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd...@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
Skitt
> (howard richler) writes:
>> The OED Online doesn't list the sense of 'cutting a cheque' in its
>> 65 senses of the verb 'to cut.' A corespondent of mine says that
>> durung WW2 the US Army used the phrase 'cut an order.' Does anybody
>> have any information on the orgin of the expression 'cutting a
>> cheque (check)?
>
> No, but it's a great question.
>
> I have a theory about "cut an order", though -- man US Army orders of
> the shortly post-war period, and I think during the war as well, were
> reproduced in multiple copies using a mimeograph. And the term for
> preparing a stencil for use on a mimeograph is "cutting". So there
> might be a connection there.
As I posted before, that's exactly what one definition of "cut" is in
MWCD10 -- typing on a stencil with the ribbon locked out of the way. I cut
many orders while I was an Assistant Batallion Clerk, and yes, they were
reproduced on a mimeograph machine.
Tony Cooper
I see it more in the area of "cutting something loose". You cut some
money loose when you cut a check.
Sean O'Leathlobhair
I have never heard this phrase but I do sometimes here the phrase "cut
code" to mean "write a computer program". I don't know its origin
and, possibly as a result, I don't like it. I am quite happy with the
more prosaic "write". Cutting code sometimes brings up a mental image
of someone chiselling the code into a stone tablet. I guess that some
geeks may like to have a computer program on their gravestones.
Seán O'Leathlóbhair
Alec McKenzie
>. . . I do sometimes here the phrase "cut
> code" to mean "write a computer program".
I think you misunderstand -- cutting code is only a small part of
writing a computer program.
--
Alec McKenzie
mcke...@despammed.com
Sean O'Leathlobhair
> jwla...@yahoo.com (Sean O'Leathlobhair) wrote:
>
> >. . . I do sometimes here the phrase "cut
> > code" to mean "write a computer program".
>
> I think you misunderstand -- cutting code is only a small part of
> writing a computer program.
What distinction do you make between writing a program and cutting
code? Do you use cutting code just to refer to the actual typing of
the code and writing a program to refer to the entire job from
requirements gathering through to testing? If that is the meaning of
cutting code then it explains why I have never felt the need to say
it. The actual typing is an insignificant part of the process.
Seán O'Leathlóbhair
Alec McKenzie
> Alec McKenzie <mcke...@despammed.com> wrote in message
> news:<mckenzie-F0971B...@news.aaisp.net.uk>...
> > jwla...@yahoo.com (Sean O'Leathlobhair) wrote:
> >
> > >. . . I do sometimes here the phrase "cut
> > > code" to mean "write a computer program".
> >
> > I think you misunderstand -- cutting code is only a small part of
> > writing a computer program.
>
> What distinction do you make between writing a program and cutting
> code? Do you use cutting code just to refer to the actual typing of
> the code and writing a program to refer to the entire job from
> requirements gathering through to testing? If that is the meaning of
> cutting code then it explains why I have never felt the need to say
> it. The actual typing is an insignificant part of the process.
Well, yes. Cutting code is the creation of the code itself, whether you
scribble it with pencil and paper or type it straight in off the top of
your head. It is certainly far from insignificant (of fundamental
importance, in fact) but in time spent it is a small part of the total
effort.
--
Alec McKenzie
mcke...@despammed.com
Richard Maurer
I have never heard this phrase but I do sometimes
here the phrase "cut code" to mean "write a computer program".
I am quite happy with the more prosaic "write". Cutting code
sometimes brings up a mental image of someone chiselling
the code into a stone tablet. I guess that some geeks may like
to have a computer program on their gravestones.
Alec McKenzie responded:
I think you misunderstand -- cutting code is only a small part of
writing a computer program.
Seán O'Leathlóbhair reresponded:
What distinction do you make between writing a program and cutting
code? Do you use cutting code just to refer to the actual typing of
the code and writing a program to refer to the entire job from
requirements gathering through to testing? If that is the meaning of
cutting code then it explains why I have never felt the need to say
it. The actual typing is an insignificant part of the process.
More like chiseling the code into a paper tablet.
The term likely comes from the days when code was stored on punch cards
or paper tape. Holes were cut into the paper. Compare the discussion
about cutting a stencil.
You must write small programs if the typing is an insignificant part.
I never used the term myself, but back in the punch card days the
"cutting code" part of the process was a lengthy part deserving
of a separate name. In some places there was a one day turnaround
between code changes -- a single syntax error meant another day
without the program actually running and producing output (or errors).
Every line, every character was checked n-1 times
before the code was cut.
I would say that the "cutting code" part has changed somewhat
so that today would mean the part that starts with typing and
and ends with the program debugged to the author's initial satisfaction.
That would include commenting, naming variables and functions,
organizing into files -- all of the nitty-gritty stuff after the main
algorithms and data structures and data flow are defined.
For most programs, this would take most of the time involved.
Any additional test suites would be something else.
-- ---------------------------------------------
Richard Maurer To reply, remove half
Sunnyvale, California of a homonym of a synonym for also.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Zimmer
I don't think that citation ("...from which the same Exchequer Bills
shall be cut") gives us much insight on the development of the modern
"cutting a che-ck/que", unless we find intervening usages between the
early 18th and late 20th centuries. I wasn't able to antedate Areff's
1981 cite for "cut a check"... even The American Banker (searchable on
Nexis) doesn't have anything before 1982:
The American Banker, August 27, 1982
Flurry of Merger Bids Testing Newark's House That Hoos Built
"If someone brought in enough shares, we were prepared to cut
a check for $1 billion that day to pay for them," he said.
Donna Richoux
[snip]
> executive secretary). She had a machine with eight or nine levers
> for setting the amount. She pulled on a handle (not unlike a non-
> electric adding machine's or cash register's crank), and the
> amount was embossed onto the check. I believe if you held one of
> these checks up to the light, you'd see the holes that were
> perforated as part of the embossed digits.
In thinking about where I first heard "cutting a check," I remembered
this sort of office-machine-printed check, too, where the words that
spell out the dollar amount are really large. I never operated such a
machine, so I didn't know what they were called.
...I see the US Patent Office lists them under "check writing machines."
Ebay has a picture of a Paymaster check writing machine:
http://i22.ebayimg.com/02/i/01/ba/0b/3c_1_b.JPG
--
Best -- Donna Richoux
Richard Maurer
No, but my personal theory is that "cutting" a cheque/check
refers to the action of removing the check from the checkbook.
There must have been a time when perforations hadn't yet
been invented, or when the invented perforations were imperfect,
and removing the check without tearing another one required scissors.
I thought this was a most reasonable explanation. Then no one could
find it in early ProQuest, so I thought that it must have come from
the days when they made those perforated checks, and other people
were cutting stencils for mimeographs.
But this just in ... and once again Maria is grounded and stable.
From a bank related book printed in 1864:
Never give out checks dated ahead. When you have need
to cut checks out of the end of your checkbook,
mark in the margin what they are for -- to supply duplicates
or otherwise. Keep your checkbooks
out of sight and reach of strangers.
Title: The banks of New York, their dealers, the clearing-house,
and the panic of 1857 ... By J. S. Gibbons
Author: Morris, Robert, 1810-1892.
New York, D. Appleton & co., 1864.
Found in the Making of America site www.hti.umich.edu/m/moagrp/
Maria Conlon
> Maria Conlon wrote:
> No, but my personal theory is that "cutting" a cheque/check
> refers to the action of removing the check from the checkbook.
> There must have been a time when perforations hadn't yet
> been invented, or when the invented perforations were imperfect,
> and removing the check without tearing another one required
> scissors.
>
>
> I thought this was a most reasonable explanation. Then no one could
> find it in early ProQuest, so I thought that it must have come from
> the days when they made those perforated checks, and other people
> were cutting stencils for mimeographs.
>
> But this just in ... and once again Maria is grounded and stable.
>
> From a bank related book printed in 1864:
>
> Never give out checks dated ahead. When you have need
> to cut checks out of the end of your checkbook,
> mark in the margin what they are for -- to supply duplicates
> or otherwise. Keep your checkbooks
> out of sight and reach of strangers.
>
>
> Title: The banks of New York, their dealers, the clearing-house,
> and the panic of 1857 ... By J. S. Gibbons
> Author: Morris, Robert, 1810-1892.
> New York, D. Appleton & co., 1864.
>
> Found in the Making of America site www.hti.umich.edu/m/moagrp/
Wow -- thank you very much, Richard. You just made my day!
Maria Conlon
Ben Zimmer
>
> Maria Conlon wrote:
> No, but my personal theory is that "cutting" a cheque/check
> refers to the action of removing the check from the checkbook.
> There must have been a time when perforations hadn't yet
> been invented, or when the invented perforations were imperfect,
> and removing the check without tearing another one required scissors.
>
> I thought this was a most reasonable explanation. Then no one could
> find it in early ProQuest, so I thought that it must have come from
> the days when they made those perforated checks, and other people
> were cutting stencils for mimeographs.
>
> But this just in ... and once again Maria is grounded and stable.
>
> From a bank related book printed in 1864:
>
> Never give out checks dated ahead. When you have need
> to cut checks out of the end of your checkbook,
> mark in the margin what they are for -- to supply duplicates
> or otherwise. Keep your checkbooks
> out of sight and reach of strangers.
>
> Title: The banks of New York, their dealers, the clearing-house,
> and the panic of 1857 ... By J. S. Gibbons
> Author: Morris, Robert, 1810-1892.
> New York, D. Appleton & co., 1864.
>
> Found in the Making of America site www.hti.umich.edu/m/moagrp/
A very interesting find, but we still have to account for more than
a century between this reference to literal check-cutting and the
figurative expression "cut a check" that emerged in AmE c. 1980.
I don't think anyone's mentioned that the expression can also be
bitransitive, meaning it can take an indirect object, as in "cut
me/you/him/her a check". The earliest citation for this form that
I can find on ProQuest is from 1981 (also the year that Safire
noted "cut a check" in his On Language column):
Bidding War for Conoco Intensifies
With Du Pont, Mobil Boosting Bids
Wall Street Journal, Jul 28, 1981, p. 3
"I'm staying with Seagram because they'll cut me
a check next Monday morning and I'll have the
cash Tuesday. Then I'll probably buy some more
Conoco and tender it to Du Pont," said one
professional speculator.
Areff
I'm inclined to think that these are unrelated usages. "Cutting a check"
today is used by people who aren't using "checkbooks", and only by those
people.
--
Sean O'Leathlobhair
> Seán O'Leathlóbhair wrote:
> I have never heard this phrase but I do sometimes
> here the phrase "cut code" to mean "write a computer program".
> I don't know its origin and, possibly as a result, I don't like it.
> I am quite happy with the more prosaic "write". Cutting code
> sometimes brings up a mental image of someone chiselling
> the code into a stone tablet. I guess that some geeks may like
> to have a computer program on their gravestones.
>
>
> Alec McKenzie responded:
> I think you misunderstand -- cutting code is only a small part of
> writing a computer program.
>
>
> Seán O'Leathlóbhair reresponded:
> What distinction do you make between writing a program and cutting
> code? Do you use cutting code just to refer to the actual typing of
> the code and writing a program to refer to the entire job from
> requirements gathering through to testing? If that is the meaning of
> cutting code then it explains why I have never felt the need to say
> it. The actual typing is an insignificant part of the process.
>
>
>
> More like chiseling the code into a paper tablet.
> The term likely comes from the days when code was stored on punch cards
> or paper tape. Holes were cut into the paper. Compare the discussion
> about cutting a stencil.
I have worked with computers long enough to have used both paper tape
and punch cards. I have a box of souvenirs with some cards and tapes
together with other odd things such as 8" diskettes. You may be right
about the origin. It may not have occurred to me since I did not do
my own "cutting". I wrote on paper and a secretary "cut" the cards or
tape. And, we had a one day turn around.
> You must write small programs if the typing is an insignificant part.
> I never used the term myself, but back in the punch card days the
> "cutting code" part of the process was a lengthy part deserving
> of a separate name. In some places there was a one day turnaround
> between code changes -- a single syntax error meant another day
> without the program actually running and producing output (or errors).
> Every line, every character was checked n-1 times
> before the code was cut.
No, I write some very large program though in these Java days, they
are usually in small pieces. In Cobol days, single programs would
reach tens of thousands of lines.
Nonetheless, I say the typing is insiginifcant since the thought that
goes into one line still exceeds the time it takes to type the line.
Is this not the case for you?
> I would say that the "cutting code" part has changed somewhat
> so that today would mean the part that starts with typing and
> and ends with the program debugged to the author's initial satisfaction.
> That would include commenting, naming variables and functions,
> organizing into files -- all of the nitty-gritty stuff after the main
> algorithms and data structures and data flow are defined.
> For most programs, this would take most of the time involved.
> Any additional test suites would be something else.
This bit, I would call writing the program which would be
distinguished from requirements gathering, design, and system testing.
I would normally include unit testing in the writing phase. When I
said the typing was insignificant, I did not mean the whole of this
writing phase, just the key punching.
> -- ---------------------------------------------
> Richard Maurer To reply, remove half
> Sunnyvale, California of a homonym of a synonym for also.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seán O'Leathlóbhair
John Varela
wrote:
> I have worked with computers long enough to have used both paper tape
> and punch cards. I have a box of souvenirs with some cards and tapes
> together with other odd things such as 8" diskettes. You may be right
> about the origin. It may not have occurred to me since I did not do
> my own "cutting". I wrote on paper and a secretary "cut" the cards or
> tape. And, we had a one day turn around.
Me too, but we didn't "cut" cards or tape. We punched them.
--
John Varela
(Trade "OLD" lamps for "NEW" for email.)
I apologize for munging the address but the spam was too much.
david56
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 09:18:28 UTC, jwla...@yahoo.com (Sean O'Leathlobhair)
> wrote:
>
> > I have worked with computers long enough to have used both paper tape
> > and punch cards. I have a box of souvenirs with some cards and tapes
> > together with other odd things such as 8" diskettes. You may be right
> > about the origin. It may not have occurred to me since I did not do
> > my own "cutting". I wrote on paper and a secretary "cut" the cards or
> > tape. And, we had a one day turn around.
>
> Me too, but we didn't "cut" cards or tape. We punched them.
We had "little girls" to punch cards for us. Except for the
occasional single card which we punched on a hand punch.
--
David
=====
Skitt
> John Varela typed thus:
>> (Sean O'Leathlobhair) wrote:
>>> I have worked with computers long enough to have used both paper
>>> tape and punch cards. I have a box of souvenirs with some cards
>>> and tapes together with other odd things such as 8" diskettes. You
>>> may be right about the origin. It may not have occurred to me
>>> since I did not do my own "cutting". I wrote on paper and a
>>> secretary "cut" the cards or tape. And, we had a one day turn
>>> around.
>>
>> Me too, but we didn't "cut" cards or tape. We punched them.
>
> We had "little girls" to punch cards for us. Except for the
> occasional single card which we punched on a hand punch.
We had the girls, but many times it was much faster, when the deck of cards
to be punched was relatively small, to punch them myself. I knew how to
prepare and use the program cards for the keypunch machine, so it was an
easy task. I worked for a large company, so going through the channels,
filling out the submittal forms, and waiting for the product could take
days. I could do the punching task in a few minutes, and I had access to a
keypunch in the back room. The union didn't like that at all, though, and I
had to be careful.
Back in those days, there were a lot of things that I could do faster and
better than those people who were specifically there to do the tasks.
Default User
Blech. I had to use a keypunch machine when I took FORTRAN back in the
70's. Those things are rough on guys like me, ones who can type quickly
but make a lot of typos. My stack of spoiled cards would be many
multiples of the final "good" stack, which usually contained many for
which I just hadn't noticed the typos yet.
Brian Rodenborn
Spehro Pefhany
<first...@boeing.com.invalid> wrote:
>Blech. I had to use a keypunch machine when I took FORTRAN back in the
>70's. Those things are rough on guys like me, ones who can type quickly
>but make a lot of typos. My stack of spoiled cards would be many
>multiples of the final "good" stack, which usually contained many for
>which I just hadn't noticed the typos yet.
>Brian Rodenborn
Couldn't you just run the bad card through a on-punch reader, copying
to just before the error, and continue punching from there? I think
that's what I recall. You could certainly do that when punching
teletype paper tape, as well as nulling the bad character by
overpunching all holes. The keyboards on the IBM 029 (?) keypunches
were, by a large margin, the best I've ever used.
Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
sp...@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
John Varela
wrote:
> Blech. I had to use a keypunch machine when I took FORTRAN back in the
> 70's. Those things are rough on guys like me, ones who can type quickly
> but make a lot of typos. My stack of spoiled cards would be many
> multiples of the final "good" stack, which usually contained many for
> which I just hadn't noticed the typos yet.
That's what the verifier was for.
John Varela
> We had "little girls" to punch cards for us. Except for the
> occasional single card which we punched on a hand punch.
Who did the punching depended on how many cards were to be punched. By the
late 50s at Chance Vought Aircraft and at The MITRE Corporation there were
plenty of women programmers.
On top of a cabinet in the room with the Maintenance Console was, if I recall
the nomenclature correctly, a Model 001 keypunch. This unit, as I recall, was
about 18 inches long and six wide. You put a card in the holder and then slid
a frame with 12 keys over it. Adjust the frame over the column you want to
punch and then press the appropriate key. I don't recall that anyone ever
actually used it, we just played with it as a curiosity. (Evaluation SAGE
Sector, MIT Lincoln Laboratory, circa 1961)
Default User
>
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 19:23:10 GMT, the renowned Default User
> <first...@boeing.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> >70's. Those things are rough on guys like me, ones who can type quickly
> >but make a lot of typos. My stack of spoiled cards would be many
> >multiples of the final "good" stack, which usually contained many for
> >which I just hadn't noticed the typos yet.
> >
>
> to just before the error, and continue punching from there? I think
> that's what I recall. You could certainly do that when punching
> teletype paper tape, as well as nulling the bad character by
> overpunching all holes. The keyboards on the IBM 029 (?) keypunches
> were, by a large margin, the best I've ever used.
There was supposed to be a way to do that, but I could never get it to
work right.
Brian Rodenborn
david56
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 17:53:48 UTC, david56 <bass.c...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> > We had "little girls" to punch cards for us. Except for the
> > occasional single card which we punched on a hand punch.
>
> Who did the punching depended on how many cards were to be punched. By the
> late 50s at Chance Vought Aircraft and at The MITRE Corporation there were
> plenty of women programmers.
Of course. But all the punch operators were female.
> On top of a cabinet in the room with the Maintenance Console was, if I recall
> the nomenclature correctly, a Model 001 keypunch. This unit, as I recall, was
> about 18 inches long and six wide. You put a card in the holder and then slid
> a frame with 12 keys over it. Adjust the frame over the column you want to
> punch and then press the appropriate key. I don't recall that anyone ever
> actually used it, we just played with it as a curiosity. (Evaluation SAGE
> Sector, MIT Lincoln Laboratory, circa 1961)
I got pretty good at single card punching on the hand punch. Rather
like this but without the idiot guide attached:
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/brochure/images/mus_058.jpg
I just loved making the termination card, which in an ICL pack was
four asterisks. The three fingered salute before Gates.
****
--
David
=====
John Varela
> I got pretty good at single card punching on the hand punch. Rather
> like this but without the idiot guide attached:
> http://www.cs.virginia.edu/brochure/images/mus_058.jpg
Very similar, but ours was an IBM 001:
http://www.rdrop.com/~jimw/Moffit_Field/34594_09.JPG
Skitt
> david56 wrote:
>> I got pretty good at single card punching on the hand punch. Rather
>> like this but without the idiot guide attached:
>> http://www.cs.virginia.edu/brochure/images/mus_058.jpg
>
> Very similar, but ours was an IBM 001:
> http://www.rdrop.com/~jimw/Moffit_Field/34594_09.JPG
As I recall, ours were the IBM 026 kind. I think there is one in the
background of your picture.
Anyway, see:
http://www.mursuky.edu/polcrjlst/ibmkeypunch.jpg
david56
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 22:06:19 UTC, david56 <bass.c...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> > I got pretty good at single card punching on the hand punch. Rather
> > like this but without the idiot guide attached:
> > http://www.cs.virginia.edu/brochure/images/mus_058.jpg
>
> Very similar, but ours was an IBM 001:
> http://www.rdrop.com/~jimw/Moffit_Field/34594_09.JPG
That's terribly sophisticated, with the card catcher and all. Our
hand punches were not much bigger than the card and could easily be
carried around. The punched card fell out onto the table.
--
David
=====
Evan Kirshenbaum
> Couldn't you just run the bad card through a on-punch reader,
> copying to just before the error, and continue punching from there?
> I think that's what I recall. You could certainly do that when
> punching teletype paper tape, as well as nulling the bad character
> by overpunching all holes. The keyboards on the IBM 029 (?)
> keypunches were, by a large margin, the best I've ever used.
Maybe if you were writing FORTRAN. I had to use one for a Pascal
class. Pascal uses a number of characters that FORTRAN doesn't. And
so the characters weren't printed on the keycaps. Like numbers, they
were accessible by using the numeric shift key, but you had to
remember that, for example (let's see, there's got to be a picture
here, ah:
http://www.columbia.edu/acis/history/029.html
) greater-than was numeric-S, colon was numeric-D, and semicolon was
numeric-F. (There was no way to do braces, which is why "(*...*)" was
an alternative syntax for comments.) Not only weren't they on the
keycaps; the machine didn't know how to print them at the top of the
card. All you got was a black "unknown character" square. So you
didn't know, until you submitted your deck, whether you had
accidentally typed a colon when you meant a semicolon. Luckily, the
computer center (at Northwestern, where I was taking the class) had a
printer that would take a deck of cards and list them, and it *did*
know about the "funny characters", so you didn't necessarily have to
wait the hour or two for your deck to come back with syntax errors.
But you did have to wait in line for an open punch to fix the ones you
got wrong the first time.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |The body was wrapped in duct tape,
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |weighted down with concrete blocks
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |and a telephone cord was tied
|around the neck. Police suspect
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com |foul play...
(650)857-7572
Evan Kirshenbaum
Looking at the USPTO site, I see that NCR applied for a patent on
April 2, 1981 (granted May 24, 1983 as US 4,385,285) for a "Check
dispensing terminal". This patent talks about "cutting checks", but
it seems (though I haven't looked at the figures) that this happens
*before* the check is printed:
The strip 110 is cut by a moveable knife 142 which is moved by an
actuator 144 against the stationary knife 146. Drive rollers 148,
150 (FIG. 5A), 168, and 170 (FIG. 5B) and their associated pinch
rollers 152, 154, 188 and 190, respectively, are then used to
transfer the cut check to the printing means 100 in FIG. 5B where
the cut check is referenced as 156.
It could be that it was the appearance of such machines that gave rise
to the terminology.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |If all else fails, embarrass the
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |industry into doing the right
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |thing.
| Dean Thompson
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com
(650)857-7572
John Varela
wrote:
> I have never heard this phrase but I do sometimes here the phrase "cut
> code" to mean "write a computer program". I don't know its origin
Me too. Me too. So I posted a question about its origin on
alt.folklore.computers (thread "Cutting Code") and it seems that no one over
there has even heard of it. Weird.
david56
> On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 08:46:57 UTC, jwla...@yahoo.com (Sean O'Leathlobhair)
> wrote:
>
> > I have never heard this phrase but I do sometimes here the phrase "cut
> > code" to mean "write a computer program". I don't know its origin
>
> Me too. Me too. So I posted a question about its origin on
> alt.folklore.computers (thread "Cutting Code") and it seems that no one over
> there has even heard of it. Weird.
Me too. I say it, occasionally.
--
David
=====
Sean O'Leathlobhair
> On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 08:46:57 UTC, jwla...@yahoo.com (Sean O'Leathlobhair)
> wrote:
>
> > I have never heard this phrase but I do sometimes here the phrase "cut
> > code" to mean "write a computer program". I don't know its origin
>
> Me too. Me too. So I posted a question about its origin on
> alt.folklore.computers (thread "Cutting Code") and it seems that no one over
> there has even heard of it. Weird.
I have not heard the phrase for quite a while. When I did hear it, it
was mostly from managers rather than the programmers themselves. I
got the impression that it was the manager's attempt to speak the
programmer's jargon. This was about as successful as a typical parent
trying to use the jargon of his teenage child. (Cue another thread
drift.)
Seán O'Leathlóbhair
Mark Brader
> > Couldn't you just run the bad card through a on-punch reader,
> > copying to just before the error, and continue punching from there?
Using the DUP button, that is. But you have to admit it's more tedious
than using a backspace key. On the other hand, it's not too bad
compared to erasing on a typewriter, especially before they invented
correction tape...
> > The keyboards on the IBM 029 (?) keypunches were, by a large margin,
> > the best I've ever used.
Evan Kirshenbaum writes:
> Maybe if you were writing FORTRAN. I had to use one for a Pascal
> class. Pascal uses a number of characters that FORTRAN doesn't. And
> so the characters weren't printed on the keycaps. Like numbers, they
> were accessible by using the numeric shift key, but you had to
> remember that, for example (let's see, there's got to be a picture
> here, ah:
>
> http://www.columbia.edu/acis/history/029.html
>
> ) greater-than was numeric-S, colon was numeric-D, and semicolon was
> numeric-F. ... Not only weren't they on the
> keycaps; the machine didn't know how to print them at the top of the
> card. All you got was a black "unknown character" square.
Oh, my. There must have been different models of 029, then -- indeed,
that web page says there were nine variants. All the ones that *I*
ever used had the keyboard exactly as diagrammed on that page, with
the shifted characters shown explicitly, and the machine *did* know
how to print all those characters along the top of the card.
--
Mark Brader | "Simple things should be simple." -- Alan Kay, on UIs
m...@vex.net | "Too many ... try to make complex things simple ...
Toronto | and succeed ... only in making simple things complex."
| -- Jeff Prothero
My text in this article is in the public domain.
Gary Williams
> howard richler wrote:
> > The OED Online doesn't list the sense of 'cutting a cheque' in its 65
> > senses of the verb 'to cut.' A corespondent of mine says that durung
> > WW2 the US Army used the phrase 'cut an order.' Does anybody have any
> > information on the orgin of the expression 'cutting a cheque (check)?
>
> No, but my personal theory is that "cutting" a cheque/check refers to
> the action of removing the check from the checkbook.
> And, is it likely a dying usage, at least in some areas of the globe?
I didn't pick it up in accounting school. Surprisingly, perhaps,
accounting school doesn't deal too much with what actually happens,
but, rather, with the recording and reporting of what has happened.
So there is little focus on the process of issuing a check; instead
all the attention is on "this payment has been made; obviously you
credit cash, but what is the debit?" You won't learn how to fill out
an expense report in accounting school, nor how to reimburse the
submitter; it's all about how to record the expense and the liability.
Like some others, I see "cutting" a check as requiring a mechanical
process. I could not imagine "cutting" a check with pen and ink. I
could imagine it with a typewriter.
I think there is a relationship with the Army's "cutting" orders,
which has remained in use long after World War II. I'm inclined to
think (although this is just my own fancy, unsupported by research)
that the cutting is the mechanical impression by typewriter on the
check, on the paper that is the order, or on the mimeograph stencil
used at one time to mass-produce an order.
Gary Williams
Michael Hamm
wrote, in part:
> > No, but my personal theory is that "cutting" a cheque/check refers to
> > the action of removing the check from the checkbook.
Not me. To me, 'cut' in this context means 'issue'. I have a vague
notion that the word 'cut' is used also in publications -- to 'cut' a new
printing of a book, perhaps? If so, then I'd say that that's the same
meaning.
> Like some others, I see "cutting" a check as requiring a mechanical
> process. I could not imagine "cutting" a check with pen and ink. I
> could imagine it with a typewriter.
Not me.
Michael Hamm NB: Of late, my e-mail address is being
AM, Math, Wash. U. St. Louis 'spoofed' a bit. That is, spammers send
msh...@math.wustl.edu e-mail that seems to be from me. Please
http://math.wustl.edu/~msh210/ realize that no spam is in fact from me.
Tony Cooper
(Michael Hamm) wrote:
>On 7 Jul 2004 07:09:50 -0700, Gary Williams <willia...@juno.com>
>wrote, in part:
>> > No, but my personal theory is that "cutting" a cheque/check refers to
>> > the action of removing the check from the checkbook.
>
>Not me. To me, 'cut' in this context means 'issue'. I have a vague
>notion that the word 'cut' is used also in publications -- to 'cut' a new
>printing of a book, perhaps? If so, then I'd say that that's the same
>meaning.
>
>> Like some others, I see "cutting" a check as requiring a mechanical
>> process. I could not imagine "cutting" a check with pen and ink. I
>> could imagine it with a typewriter.
>
>Not me.
Cut him some slack.
Michael Hamm
> Like some others, I see "cutting" a check as requiring a mechanical
> process. I could not imagine "cutting" a check with pen and ink. I
> could imagine it with a typewriter.
msh210:
> Not me.
On Wed, 07 Jul 2004 11:51:12 -0400, Tony Cooper
<tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote, in part:
> Cut him some slack.
Who, me? For my comment? Pardon me: I meant "Not I [see it as requiring
a mechanical process]."
Tony Cooper
(Michael Hamm) wrote:
>Someone:
>> Like some others, I see "cutting" a check as requiring a mechanical
>> process. I could not imagine "cutting" a check with pen and ink. I
>> could imagine it with a typewriter.
>
>msh210:
>> Not me.
>
>On Wed, 07 Jul 2004 11:51:12 -0400, Tony Cooper
><tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote, in part:
>> Cut him some slack.
>
>Who, me? For my comment? Pardon me: I meant "Not I [see it as requiring
>a mechanical process]."
>
No criticism was intended. I was just offering a different meaning
for "cut". It was not intended as a cutting comment or to cut you off
in any way.