Need a verb for "creating a campus"
Harvey Van Sickle
in point form, the radical clearance of earlier development and streets
to create a college (now university) campus.
"The maps show the radical nature of the redevelopment, and the
resulting (campusing? campusification? campusificationalisation?
....hmmmmmm......) of the site".
I may resign myself to using a descriptive phrase, but I'd love to find
a single verb -- any suggestions?
--
Cheers, Harvey
Ottawa/Toronto/Edmonton for 30 years;
Southern England for the past 21 years.
(for e-mail, change harvey to whhvs)
mickwick
>I'm in the middle of writing a topographical summary which describes,
>in point form, the radical clearance of earlier development and streets
>to create a college (now university) campus.
>
>"The maps show the radical nature of the redevelopment, and the
>resulting (campusing? campusification? campusificationalisation?
>....hmmmmmm......) of the site".
>
>I may resign myself to using a descriptive phrase, but I'd love to find
>a single verb -- any suggestions?
Institutionalisation.
--
Mickwick
Harvey Van Sickle
Hmmm...perhaps. I had in mind something more specific to campuses --
"institutionalisation" could, I think, cover the re-use of existing
streets or building of a megastructure, rather than the creation of a
completely new layout of discrete-but-related buildings.
R F
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003, Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
> I'm in the middle of writing a topographical summary which describes,
> in point form, the radical clearance of earlier development and streets
> to create a college (now university) campus.
>
> "The maps show the radical nature of the redevelopment, and the
> resulting (campusing? campusification? campusificationalisation?
> ....hmmmmmm......) of the site".
>
> I may resign myself to using a descriptive phrase, but I'd love to find
> a single verb -- any suggestions?
Use 'campusization' (in quotes, the first time you use it).
mickwick
>On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 12:44:07 GMT, mickwick wrote
>> In alt.usage.english, Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
>>> "The maps show the radical nature of the redevelopment, and the
>>> resulting (campusing? campusification? campusificationalisation?
>>> ....hmmmmmm......) of the site".
>>>
>>> I may resign myself to using a descriptive phrase, but I'd love
>>> to find a single verb -- any suggestions?
>>
>> Institutionalisation.
>
>Hmmm...perhaps. I had in mind something more specific to campuses --
>"institutionalisation" could, I think, cover the re-use of existing
>streets or building of a megastructure, rather than the creation of a
>completely new layout of discrete-but-related buildings.
True.
If it's a typical block-strewn-lawn campus, why not 'sterilisation'?
Seriously, I think 'campusing' is your best bet. Or 'encampusment'? No,
that's even more barbaric. (What were campuses called in BrE before they
were called campuses? I think campus is a fairly recent import from
America.)
--
Mick 'My architecture is very rusty, in the best Corbusian fashion' wick
Harvey Van Sickle
I'll ponder that: I'm leaning towards "campusing" (in quotes), as it
seems cleaner than the -isation form.
Harvey Van Sickle
> In alt.usage.english, Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 12:44:07 GMT, mickwick wrote
>>> In alt.usage.english, Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
>
>>>> "The maps show the radical nature of the redevelopment, and the
>>>> resulting (campusing? campusification?
>>>> campusificationalisation? ....hmmmmmm......) of the site".
>>>>
>>>> I may resign myself to using a descriptive phrase, but I'd love
>>>> to find a single verb -- any suggestions?
>>>
>>> Institutionalisation.
>>
>> Hmmm...perhaps. I had in mind something more specific to
>> campuses -- "institutionalisation" could, I think, cover the
>> re-use of existing streets or building of a megastructure, rather
>> than the creation of a completely new layout of
>> discrete-but-related buildings.
>
> True.
>
> If it's a typical block-strewn-lawn campus, why not
> 'sterilisation'?
>
> Seriously, I think 'campusing' is your best bet.
That's what I'll probably opt for - as mentioned to Richard, though,
I'll put it in quotes the first time I use it.
> Or 'encampusment'? No, that's even more barbaric.
A *seriously* ugly word, for some reason.....
> (What were campuses called in BrE before they were called
> campuses? I think campus is a fairly recent import from America.)
I don't think they really existed prior to the greenfield-site
universities of the 1960s, at which date the term would have been
imported. Prior to that development, they tended to be either
buildings belonging to a single college or a collection of
miscellaneous structures scattered around part of the city.
Frances Kemmish
>
> I'll ponder that: I'm leaning towards "campusing" (in quotes), as it
> seems cleaner than the -isation form.
>
At my daughter's high school, "campusing" meant being confined to campus
for some misdeed.
Fran
Gary Vellenzer
harve...@ntlworld.com says...
> I'm in the middle of writing a topographical summary which describes,
> in point form, the radical clearance of earlier development and streets
> to create a college (now university) campus.
>
> "The maps show the radical nature of the redevelopment, and the
> resulting (campusing? campusification? campusificationalisation?
> ....hmmmmmm......) of the site".
>
> I may resign myself to using a descriptive phrase, but I'd love to find
> a single verb -- any suggestions?
>
itself create a campus.
"Reinvention as a campus". There is no need to strive for a single word.
Gary
huchal
"Gary Vellenzer" <nyc...@seznam.cz> wrote in message
news:MPG.19d8e010d...@news.CIS.DFN.DE...
> In article <Xns93FE8B10...@62.253.162.115>,
> harve...@ntlworld.com says...
> > I'm in the middle of writing a topographical summary which describes,
> > in point form, the radical clearance of earlier development and streets
> > to create a college (now university) campus.
> >
campustration...
...like castration without the mpu (minor political upheaval)
hc
--
Dublin, Ireland
Laura F Spira
[..]
>
>>(What were campuses called in BrE before they were called
>>campuses? I think campus is a fairly recent import from America.)
>
>
> I don't think they really existed prior to the greenfield-site
> universities of the 1960s, at which date the term would have been
> imported. Prior to that development, they tended to be either
> buildings belonging to a single college or a collection of
> miscellaneous structures scattered around part of the city.
>
I certainly can't remember the word being used when I was at
university in the 1960s and IIRC even the prospectus for the University
of East
Anglia did not use the word campus in the caption to a photo of the
empty field on which it was to be built.
I think that "campusing" could be very confusing. It makes me think of
someone prancing about the campus. (And should it be "campussing"?)
I also have a problem with your sentence:
"The maps show the radical nature of the redevelopment, and the
resulting (campusing? campusification? campusificationalisation?
....hmmmmmm......) of the site".
This seems to imply that the campus appeared as a result of the radical
redevelopment. Does this mean that the site was redeveloped, after which
someone thought "What a great place for a campus!"? Or, perhaps more
likely, did the campus form part of the redevelopment? Would "the
subsequent establishment of the campus on the site" be clearer?
--
Laura
(emulate St. George for email)
huchal
> campustration...
>
> ...like castration without the mpu (minor political upheaval)
>
> hc
That should've been *with* mpu, of course.
--
Dublin, Ireland
Harvey Van Sickle
>> I may resign myself to using a descriptive phrase, but I'd love
>> to find a single verb -- any suggestions?
-snip-
> "Reinvention as a campus". There is no need to strive for a single
> word.
Whether or not it's technically necessary is rather beside the point:
I'd much *prefer* to use a single word. Using a phrase is (as I've
recognised) a perfectly feasible alternative, but to my mind it's much
less desirable in a point-form summary.
(As an aside, I don't see the process as "reinvention": it was
intentional and total obliteration of all existing development to
create cleared space. Admittedly, the developers might well have spun
this as "reinvention", but I'd reserve that term for cases where the
existing infrastructure was adapted to an entirely new use.)
Harvey Van Sickle
Interesting; I've never heard that use.
(In this case, the context would make it clear that I meant "creation
of a campus".)
Harvey Van Sickle
> [..]
> I also have a problem with your sentence:
>
> "The maps show the radical nature of the redevelopment, and the
> resulting (campusing? campusification? campusificationalisation?
> ....hmmmmmm......) of the site".
> This seems to imply that the campus appeared as a result of the
> radical redevelopment. Does this mean that the site was
> redeveloped, after which someone thought "What a great place for a
> campus!"? Or, perhaps more likely, did the campus form part of the
> redevelopment? Would "the subsequent establishment of the campus
> on the site" be clearer?
I think this was Gary's point as well, when he categorically stated
that it should be "subsequent". The problem with "subsequent
establishment" is that the process sounds sequential, and it wasn't.
In this case, a large area was cleared in order to create land for the
university, but some of the buildings already existed. The existing
structures were surrounded by terraces of houses and various commercial
buildings, and these streets and buildings were obliterated to give a
free hand to the planning and positioning of additional collegiate
buildings. The disposition of buildings created a campus.
I suppose I could change it to "concurrent establishment", but that's
not really the reason why I used "resulting" in this commentary on the
maps: what I meant was that the maps show (a) the radical nature of
the redevelopment; and (b) the extent to which the resulting landscape
was a campus (rather than a network of urban streets which happened to
accommodate university buildings).
Laura F Spira
You're trying to describe something quite complex there so I'm not sure
that a single word would help. "Campusing" or any variation might only
indicate to readers the straightforward building of a campus on the
site, depending on the broader context of your sentence.
How about "resulting (re)configuration of the site as a campus"?
Harvey Van Sickle
> Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 15:42:16 GMT, Laura F Spira wrote
>>> [..]
> sure that a single word would help. "Campusing" or any variation
> might only indicate to readers the straightforward building of a
> campus on the site, depending on the broader context of your
> sentence.
> How about "resulting (re)configuration of the site as a campus"?
Yes: a phrase like that would certainly do it, but it was just a
point-form topographical summary and commentary to accompany a few
maps, so that may be overly precise for the task at hand.
(It was on the level of "This happened; then that happened; then a
third thing happened; and the maps show the extent to which it's now a
campus rather than a collection of streets". Very basic commentary.)
mickwick
>A single verb can't do the process justice. How about:
>
>".... resulting Procrustean petrification of the educational epistemic
>categories of the 1960s <replace with appropriate date> into the
>bricks and mortar taxonomy of a college campus."
Or how about borrowing a fortuitously verbless sentence from the
manifesto of a revered 20th-century architectural visionary?
The maps show
The ideal of modern architecture being an articulated mechanical
adequacy that not only frees human phenomena from robotism of
inevitable survival functions; but also, and moreover, tends
towards progressive material unselfconsciousness of control, of
such adequate mechanics of universal life intercourse, as to
bring into high relief the residuary "mental", or "time",
awareness of only the eternally ex-static: harmonic, phenomena
- thus bespeaking, via the contemporarily, and embryonically,
envisioned universal architecture (i.e., radionic-time-growth
composition, progressively complementary to, and synchronizable
with, a comprehensive life concept, scientifically arrived at,
and harmoniously sustained), an eventual elimination of the
"time" phenomena (a "past" and "future" based on auto-suggestive
procrastinating fallacial concept of the "would-be static
entrenchment of the selfish ego") which "time" phenomena blinds
the ego to the infinity of the eternal "now", visible only
through the universally concerned intellectual optics of
integrity.น
Yeah, I know, it's a bit long for your purposes, Harvey, and it might
require an explanatory map of its own (perhaps supplemented by a bullet-
point list of its less obvious features) but otherwise whaddya think?
น That's a completely accurate transcription of an anthologised version
of the manifesto. The colon might be a printing error but I suspect that
the other peculiarities are authentic.
A Totally Unofficial Saanen to the first person to identify the
visionary. I'm fairly sure he's Google-proof.
--
Mickwick
Martin Ambuhl
> "Reinvention as a campus". There is no need to strive for a single word.
I think we've had about enough of the word "reinvention." It is a media
cliché used to mask the absence of thought. The enamourment with this word
has lasted too long by a decade at least.
--
Martin Ambuhl
Gary Vellenzer
mam...@earthlink.net says...
> Gary Vellenzer wrote:
>
>
> > "Reinvention as a campus". There is no need to strive for a single word.
>
> I think we've had about enough of the word "reinvention." It is a media
> cliché used to mask the absence of thought.
In this case no thought is required, and a cliche is the term of choice
for the type of prose that the OP was writing.
Think about it.
Gary
Harvey Van Sickle
WhaddI think? I think a substantial part of my living over the past 20
years as a consulting topographical and architectural historian has
been rooted in the demonstrable fact that architects can't write worth
diddly-squat. That's what I think.....[1]
> น That's a completely accurate transcription of an anthologised
> version of the manifesto. The colon might be a printing error but
> I suspect that the other peculiarities are authentic.
>
> A Totally Unofficial Saanen to the first person to identify the
> visionary. I'm fairly sure he's Google-proof.
No idea -- Corb? It could be one of many who followed in the footsteps
of people like Louis Sullivan by composing impenetrable manifestos.
There's a whole raft of deluded souls out there who think that only
polysyllabic maundering could possibly explain good design.[2]
[1]Long may they remain so....or at least until I'm ready to retire....
[2]The crapposity of the prose should not be taken as evidence of bad
design -- Sullivan's work was so neck-turningly good that it's actually
worth trying to wade through the terrible writing to see what he
thought he was trying to accomplish.
--
Cheers, Harvey
Harvey Van Sickle
A most elegant way of attempting to wriggle out of having suggested
"reinvention" with a straight face, and then realising what you've
done.
Well done, you!
mickwick
>I'm fairly sure he's Google-proof.
No I'm not.
--
Mickwick
John Varela
The maps show the radical nature of the redevelopment, and the subsequent
growth of the campus into the site.
or
...spread of the campus into the site.
...advance of the campus into the site.
...invasion of the site by the campus.
...utilization of the site by the college.
--
John Varela
Harvey Van Sickle
> On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 15:32:22 UTC, Gary Vellenzer (although snipped)
> <nyc...@seznam.cz> wrote:
>> In article <Xns93FE8B10...@62.253.162.115>,
>> harve...@ntlworld.com says...
-snip-
>>> "The maps show the radical nature of the redevelopment, and the
>>> resulting (campusing? campusification?
>>> campusificationalisation? ....hmmmmmm......) of the site".
-snip-
> The maps show the radical nature of the redevelopment, and the
> subsequent growth of the campus into the site.
>
> or
>
> ...spread of the campus into the site.
> ...advance of the campus into the site.
> ...invasion of the site by the campus.
> ...utilization of the site by the college.
Hmmm....except, that's not what they show -- or, at least, it wasn't
the point I was making by commenting on the maps.
The sequence of maps show the wholesale removal of an earlier
urban pattern and its replacement -- over a short (5-to-10-year) period
-- of a non-urban (or perhaps anti-urban) campus layout.
The campus didn't grow, spread, advance, invade, or merely utilise the
site: the previous uses were evicted and the site cleared for the
creation of an entirely different pattern and disposition of uses.
Incidentallly, jargonising this would be easy:
The maps show the extent to which the language of the built
landscape changed when the alien ethos of a suburban campus
was imposed on this previously-urban site.
(It's scary just how easy that is to do -- but it blows the hell out of
your word budget when you're trying to summarise 400 years of
development on a single A4 page.)
mickwick
>[2]The crapposity of the prose should not be taken as evidence of bad
>design -- Sullivan's work was so neck-turningly good that it's actually
>worth trying to wade through the terrible writing to see what he
>thought he was trying to accomplish.
That sounds like an interesting exercise.
I don't think I've read any of Sullivan's writings but when I studied
architecture donkeys years ago in the dim and distant I think I thought
of him as being as much an entrepreneur and engineer as an architect,
not the sort of person you'd suspect of pseudo-intellectualism. I'm
surprised and intrigued to hear that he, too, was a pseud.
Encarta search: Ah! So he was the original Form Follows Function man.
I'd forgotten that (if I ever knew it).
--
Mickwick
Harvey Van Sickle
He was indeed -- but he included as a primary function the need to
express the glory of an underlying life force/deity/whatever.
For what it's worth, I think he was probably on to something -- the
architecture certainly was -- but "form follows function" got hijacked
in the early 20th century by literalistic Teutonics like Loos. (He
wasathe "Ornament is Crime" man, and clearly couldn't recognise a
syllogistic fallacy if it fell on his head.)
John Dawkins
Harvey Van Sickle <harve...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> I'm in the middle of writing a topographical summary which describes,
> in point form, the radical clearance of earlier development and streets
> to create a college (now university) campus.
>
> "The maps show the radical nature of the redevelopment, and the
> resulting (campusing? campusification? campusificationalisation?
> ....hmmmmmm......) of the site".
Almamatericulation.
--
J.
Frances Kemmish
> The sequence of maps show the wholesale removal of an earlier
> urban pattern and its replacement -- over a short (5-to-10-year) period
> -- of a non-urban (or perhaps anti-urban) campus layout.
>
> The campus didn't grow, spread, advance, invade, or merely utilise the
> site: the previous uses were evicted and the site cleared for the
> creation of an entirely different pattern and disposition of uses.
>
> Incidentallly, jargonising this would be easy:
>
> The maps show the extent to which the language of the built
> landscape changed when the alien ethos of a suburban campus
> was imposed on this previously-urban site.
>
> (It's scary just how easy that is to do -- but it blows the hell out of
> your word budget when you're trying to summarise 400 years of
> development on a single A4 page.)
>
I don't know of a specific term for "replacement by university campus",
but what you're describing is "urban renewal", which rarely has anything
to with renewal, other than the use of the word.
I have a series of insurance maps of Seymout CT, which show a similar
wholesale destruction of a neighbouthood of small business, low-rent
housing, and retail establishments, torn down as part of a late 1950s
(if I recall correctly) "urban renewal" project that replaced a
community with an elevated highway.
Incidentally, the same process produced the World Trade Center development.
Fran
Don Aitken
<harve...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>WhaddI think? I think a substantial part of my living over the past 20
>years as a consulting topographical and architectural historian has
>been rooted in the demonstrable fact that architects can't write worth
>diddly-squat. That's what I think.....[1]
>
I came across an interesting comment on architectural historians in
the Introduction to the 1996 biography of Horace Walpole by Timothy
Mowl. The main point of the book is that previous writers on Walpole
have denied or evaded his homosexuality. Mowl says:
"If readers suspect that a writer like myself, happily married to a
second wife and the experienced father of a school-age son, has no
business analysing the subtleties of homosexual attitudes in the
eighteenth century, then they are probably unaware how much homosexual
activity and internecine conflict is commonplace in the world of
architectural historians. My profession has been a perfect
preparation, and this I report in no spirit of complaint, for the
Strawberry Hill set."
When I read this snippet to a friend with contacts in the profession,
she responded "well, of course; everybody knows that." Does your
experience bear this out?
--
Don Aitken
Harvey Van Sickle
> "If readers suspect that a writer like myself, happily married to
> a second wife and the experienced father of a school-age son, has
> no business analysing the subtleties of homosexual attitudes in
> the eighteenth century, then they are probably unaware how much
> homosexual activity and internecine conflict is commonplace in the
> world of architectural historians. My profession has been a
> perfect preparation, and this I report in no spirit of complaint,
> for the Strawberry Hill set."
>
> When I read this snippet to a friend with contacts in the
> profession, she responded "well, of course; everybody knows that."
> Does your experience bear this out?
>
Yes, pretty well. I don't know to what extent if any the proportion is
higher than in the general population, but it never surprises me to
discover that someone is gay. (The same goes for "artistic" -- as
opposed to workaday -- architects; it's not an issue, but it's not a
surprise, either.)
I suspect that in traditional architectural (as opposed to building)
history, this has a lot to do with the field's position as a sub-
category of art history -- fine arts has always tended to attract its
fair share of a "soft" following.
As for internecine conflict, I think almost every field flatters itself
that it's probably tops in the back-biting league. The worst field for
that that I've *ever* brushed against, though, is archaeology.
Don Aitken
<harve...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
I have a quote for the archaeologists too:
"Archaeological discusion is as often an indulgence as a discipline;
where they might exchange hypotheses archaeologists are apt to demand
adherence and to hurl polemics, and even charges of corruption".
From the Introduction to Colin McEvedy's "Penguin Atlas of Ancient
History".
--
Don Aitken
Harvey Van Sickle
>> As for internecine conflict, I think almost every field flatters
>> itself that it's probably tops in the back-biting league. The
>> worst field for that that I've *ever* brushed against, though, is
>> archaeology.
> I have a quote for the archaeologists too:
> "Archaeological discusion is as often an indulgence as a
> discipline; where they might exchange hypotheses archaeologists
> are apt to demand adherence and to hurl polemics, and even charges
> of corruption".
> From the Introduction to Colin McEvedy's "Penguin Atlas of Ancient
> History".
My suspicion is that this has got worse over the past quarter-century
as the field of archaeology has gone through the process of
"professionalising" itself.
There are still a lot of people who worked their way into the heirachy
from the ground up (so to speak), with no academic or professional
qualifications. The animosity between the two sides is predictably
intense.
(A similar thing happened in architecture after the RIBA was
established in the 1830s -- it took almost a century before it worked
its way through the system, and there are still hold-outs.)
mickwick
>On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 21:34:25 GMT, mickwick wrote
>> Encarta search: Ah! So he was the original Form Follows Function
>> man. I'd forgotten that (if I ever knew it).
>
>He was indeed -- but he included as a primary function the need to
>express the glory of an underlying life force/deity/whatever.
>
>For what it's worth, I think he was probably on to something -- the
>architecture certainly was -- but "form follows function" got hijacked
>in the early 20th century by literalistic Teutonics like Loos. (He
>wasathe "Ornament is Crime" man, and clearly couldn't recognise a
>syllogistic fallacy if it fell on his head.)
Be fair! Is it syllogistic to argue that (a) tattoos are a form of
ornament, (b) many criminals wear tattoos, (c) therefore ornament is a
crime?
Oh yes, it probably is. Never mind.
Loos, 1908:
The modern man who tattoos himself is either a criminal or a
degenerate. There are prisons in which eighty per cent of the
inmates show tattoos. The tattooed who are not in prison are
latent criminals or degenerate aristocrats. If someone who is
tattooed dies at liberty, it means he has died a few years
before committing a murder.
[All ornament is art. All art is erotic. Erotic graffiti in
public toilets is degenerate. Therefore ornament is degenerate.]
A country's culture can be assessed by the extent to which its
lavatory walls are smeared. In the child this is a natural
phenomenon: its first artistic expression is to scribble erotic
symbols on the walls. But what is natural to the Papuan and the
child is a symptom of degeneracy in the modern adult. I have
made the following discovery and I pass it on to the world: *The
evolution of culture is synonymous with the removal of ornament
from utilitarian objects*. I believed with this discovery I was
bringing joy to the world; it has not thanked me.
Poor Adolf.
(By the way, do you think his obsession with toilet walls is further
proof of nominative determinism?)
--
Mickwick
Harvey Van Sickle
> In alt.usage.english, Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 21:34:25 GMT, mickwick wrote
>> For what it's worth, I think he was probably on to something --
>> the architecture certainly was -- but "form follows function" got
>> hijacked in the early 20th century by literalistic Teutonics like
>> Loos. (He wasathe "Ornament is Crime" man, and clearly couldn't
>> recognise a syllogistic fallacy if it fell on his head.)
>
> Be fair! Is it syllogistic to argue that (a) tattoos are a form of
> ornament, (b) many criminals wear tattoos, (c) therefore ornament
> is a crime?
>
> Oh yes, it probably is. Never mind.
It's reassuring to see I'm not the only one who noticed this......
> Loos, 1908:
>
-snip-
> [All ornament is art. All art is erotic. Erotic graffiti
> in public toilets is degenerate. Therefore ornament is
> degenerate.]
What a marvellous collection of fallacies of distribution.....I'd total
them up if my calculator accepted that many digits....
> A country's culture can be assessed by the extent to which
> its lavatory walls are smeared. In the child this is a
> natural phenomenon: its first artistic expression is to
> scribble erotic symbols on the walls. But what is natural
> to the Papuan and the child is a symptom of degeneracy in
> the modern adult. I have made the following discovery and
> I pass it on to the world: *The evolution of culture is
> synonymous with the removal of ornament from utilitarian
> objects*. I believed with this discovery I was bringing
> joy to the world; it has not thanked me.
>
> Poor Adolf.
>
> (By the way, do you think his obsession with toilet walls is
> further proof of nominative determinism?)
I blame the Papuans. You should never expose an Austro-Hungarian Czech
to the Papuans.
--
Cheers, Harvey
Gary Vellenzer
harve...@ntlworld.com says...
> On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 19:48:50 GMT, Gary Vellenzer wrote
>
> > In article
> > <F3Ibb.55278$Aq2....@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
> > mam...@earthlink.net says...
> >> Gary Vellenzer wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> "Reinvention as a campus". There is no need to strive for a
> >>> single word
> > .
> >>
> >> I think we've had about enough of the word "reinvention." It is
> >> a media
> >
> >> cliché used to mask the absence of thought.
> >
> > In this case no thought is required, and a cliche is the term of
> > choice for the type of prose that the OP was writing.
> >
> > Think about it.
>
> A most elegant way of attempting to wriggle out of having suggested
> "reinvention" with a straight face, and then realising what you've
> done.
>
> Well done, you!
>
intentional. I like to use cliches, just for the hell of it, when they
are appropriate.
Gary
John O'Flaherty
<harve...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>I'm in the middle of writing a topographical summary which describes,
>in point form, the radical clearance of earlier development and streets
>to create a college (now university) campus.
>
>"The maps show the radical nature of the redevelopment, and the
>resulting (campusing? campusification? campusificationalisation?
>....hmmmmmm......) of the site".
>
>I may resign myself to using a descriptive phrase, but I'd love to find
>a single verb -- any suggestions?
Universitastasis. Whoops, verb- universitastasize.
--
john
Radiohead
"Harvey Van Sickle" <harve...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:Xns93FE8B10...@62.253.162.115...
> I'm in the middle of writing a topographical summary which describes,
> in point form, the radical clearance of earlier development and streets
> to create a college (now university) campus.
>
> "The maps show the radical nature of the redevelopment, and the
> resulting (campusing? campusification? campusificationalisation?
> ....hmmmmmm......) of the site".
>
> I may resign myself to using a descriptive phrase, but I'd love to find
> a single verb -- any suggestions?
>
> Cheers, Harvey
Having read through your thread with interest I agree that I don't believe
there is a suitable single verb.
If there had been your word count would have been 16.
How about this sentence (word count 14):
"The maps show the radical redevelopment of the site and its ongoing campus
project".
Its use in conjunction with the maps and any other supporting material
should make the sentence crystal clear - it conveys the scope of the
development and the transition of the site into a campus, a transition which
is current and not yet finished.
Don Aitken
wrote:
>
>"Harvey Van Sickle" <harve...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>news:Xns93FE8B10...@62.253.162.115...
>> I'm in the middle of writing a topographical summary which describes,
>> in point form, the radical clearance of earlier development and streets
>> to create a college (now university) campus.
>>
>> "The maps show the radical nature of the redevelopment, and the
>> resulting (campusing? campusification? campusificationalisation?
>> ....hmmmmmm......) of the site".
>>
>> I may resign myself to using a descriptive phrase, but I'd love to find
>> a single verb -- any suggestions?
>>
>Having read through your thread with interest I agree that I don't believe
>there is a suitable single verb.
>If there had been your word count would have been 16.
>
>How about this sentence (word count 14):
>
>"The maps show the radical redevelopment of the site and its ongoing campus
>project".
>
>Its use in conjunction with the maps and any other supporting material
>should make the sentence crystal clear - it conveys the scope of the
>development and the transition of the site into a campus, a transition which
>is current and not yet finished.
>
Delete "radical" (press-agent's word). Delete "ongoing" (last year's
vogue word) and substitute "current". 13 words.
--
Don Aitken
Radiohead
"Don Aitken" <don-a...@freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:3ln6nvcgk3f7re3f5...@4ax.com...
Fair enough! Maybe together we've solved the OP's problem. Where do we send
the invoice?
Harvey Van Sickle
-snip re: "radical redevelopment"-
> Delete "radical" (press-agent's word).
In this case the word was used with intended precision to mean
"redeveloped wholly and entirely, leaving no evidence of the previous
form", as opposed to partial or superficial redevelopment. A root-and-
branch operation, so to speak.
(The summary was analytical rather than promotional: indeed, the
"radical" nature was being judged as undesirable rather than
admirable.)
I hadn't realised that this use of "radical" has been skunked for
people, but it clearly has been for you. In which case, what word
would you suggest as a substitute to clarify that the redevelopment was
"radical" (in this sense) rather than "partial or incremental"?
Harvey Van Sickle
> "Don Aitken" <don-a...@freeuk.com> wrote in message
> news:3ln6nvcgk3f7re3f5...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 19:31:51 GMT, "Radiohead" <ra...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> "Harvey Van Sickle" <harve...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns93FE8B10...@62.253.162.115...
-snip-
>>>> "The maps show the radical nature of the redevelopment, and the
>>>> resulting (campusing? campusification?
>>>> campusificationalisation? ....hmmmmmm......) of the site".
>>>>
>>>> I may resign myself to using a descriptive phrase, but I'd love
>>>> to find a single verb -- any suggestions?
>>>>
>>> Having read through your thread with interest I agree that I
>>> don't believe there is a suitable single verb. If there had been
>>> your word count would have been 16.
>>> How about this sentence (word count 14):
>>> "The maps show the radical redevelopment of the site and its
>>> ongoing campus project".
>>> Its use in conjunction with the maps and any other supporting
>>> material should make the sentence crystal clear - it conveys the
>>> scope of the development and the transition of the site into a
>>> campus, a transition which is current and not yet finished.
But that's one of the points I was making: it *was* finished. The
older urban pattern had been entirely replaced with a campus layout.
(As mentioned in my response to Don, this was the sense of "radical"
that I was trying to use -- the one that means "root-and-branch as
opposed to incremental, partial or superficial".)
>> Delete "radical" (press-agent's word). Delete "ongoing" (last
>> year's vogue word) and substitute "current". 13 words.
> Fair enough! Maybe together we've solved the OP's problem. Where
> do we send the invoice?
Too late: I had to send the notes and maps to them on Tuesday! (And
yes, they've already been invoiced for it.....)
For what it's worth, I settled on "campusing", in quotes. As mentioned
somewhere in this thread, it was a minor comment, but I found the lack
of a verb and noun for this process of "campusing" to be a challenge.
Don Aitken
<harve...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 22:27:08 GMT, Don Aitken wrote
>
>-snip re: "radical redevelopment"-
>
>
>> Delete "radical" (press-agent's word).
>
>In this case the word was used with intended precision to mean
>"redeveloped wholly and entirely, leaving no evidence of the previous
>form", as opposed to partial or superficial redevelopment. A root-and-
>branch operation, so to speak.
>
>(The summary was analytical rather than promotional: indeed, the
>"radical" nature was being judged as undesirable rather than
>admirable.)
>
>I hadn't realised that this use of "radical" has been skunked for
>people, but it clearly has been for you. In which case, what word
>would you suggest as a substitute to clarify that the redevelopment was
>"radical" (in this sense) rather than "partial or incremental"?
Complete?
--
Don Aitken
Harvey Van Sickle
Possibly.
On its own, though, "complete" could be taken merely to mean "finished"
rather than "radical" in the sense I was trying to get at, so I suspect
one would need to add an additional term to emphasise
the....um....radical nature of it.
"Complete and utter" or "complete and total" might work, but both of
those sound even more clichéd to my ear than "radical".
In my view, shorter words are generally to be preferred to longer ones,
but perhaps "thoroughgoing" would do the trick?