Nett or Net ?
Ian Hinson
"nett" spelt with 2 "t"s.
It would have been used the following context:
* Weight 13oz nett. This meant weight excluding packaging.
* Nett price, which meant full price less discount.
Is this spelling now defunct?
(if so, presumably by virtue of the English speaking world's continual
Americanisation, oops Americanization)
Or would that still be the correct spelling for that particular meaning of
the word "nett".
Adrian Bailey
news:tQyCb.50546$aT.3...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
I think the second t has always been optional. I just had a look at a couple
of old Ladybird books and both have the price "net" on the cover. That was
in the days when they still spelled "show/shown" as "shew/shewn".
Adrian
John Dean
If you are very old indeed you may have seen it. The most recent OED cite
for the double t seems to be:
<< 1844 H. H. Wilson Brit. India III. 368 A pension proportioned to the
nett revenue. >>
Though even Sam Pepys knew what it was supposed to be:
<< 1666–7 Pepys Diary 21 Jan., The net profits of which+will amount to
3000l. >>
'Net' in the sense of clean has a long history of variant spellings - nette,
nett, neth, nete et al
Well done on correcting yourself on 'Americanization' by the way. As you
obviously realised in time, OED doesn't recognise 'Americanisation'. It
cites no less an authority than the Times:
1860 Times 12 Apr. 8/2 This Americanization is represented to us as the
greatest of calamities.
--
John Dean
Oxford
De-frag to reply
Spehro Pefhany
I have not seen it for a while, but I have seen it used that way.
Real estate ads sometimes show industrial rents as "net net net",
which means a whole bunch of stuff will be added on. It would be more
convenient if they could just write "nettt".
Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
sp...@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
Raymond S. Wise
news:brf2pl$r9u$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
> Ian Hinson wrote:
> > In days of old (ie. when I was somewhat younger) I think I saw the
> > word "nett" spelt with 2 "t"s.
> > It would have been used the following context:
> >
> > * Weight 13oz nett. This meant weight excluding packaging.
> > * Nett price, which meant full price less discount.
> >
> > Is this spelling now defunct?
> > (if so, presumably by virtue of the English speaking world's continual
> > Americanisation, oops Americanization)
> > Or would that still be the correct spelling for that particular
> > meaning of the word "nett".
>
> If you are very old indeed you may have seen it. The most recent OED cite
> for the double t seems to be:
>
> << 1844 H. H. Wilson Brit. India III. 368 A pension proportioned to the
> nett revenue. >>
>
> Though even Sam Pepys knew what it was supposed to be:
>
> 3000l. >>
I don't think you can count on that source for spelling cites dated prior to
1825, when it was first published (and the OED may be citing a later
edition). As it says at
http://www.pepysdiary.com/about/text/
"Pepys wrote the bulk of his diary in a shorthand devised by Thomas Shelton,
with only a few words, such as names of people and places, written
longhand[....]"
>
> 'Net' in the sense of clean has a long history of variant spellings -
nette,
> nett, neth, nete et al
>
> Well done on correcting yourself on 'Americanization' by the way. As you
> obviously realised in time, OED doesn't recognise 'Americanisation'. It
> cites no less an authority than the Times:
>
> 1860 Times 12 Apr. 8/2 This Americanization is represented to us as the
> greatest of calamities.
--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com
Ian Hinson
No more than a couple of decades ago (on packaging) I'm sure.
I'll keep a look out. It's rare, but not that rare.
> 1860 Times 12 Apr. 8/2
> This Americanization is represented to us as the
> greatest of calamities.
How very prophetic of them.
Raymond S. Wise
Note, however, that we cannot tell from the quote in question whether the
Times itself agreed with the representation.
Yukon Jack
Hinson <ppar...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> In days of old (ie. when I was somewhat younger) I think I saw the word
> "nett" spelt with 2 "t"s.
And I can recall in First Grade (1948) being taught that "today" and
"tomorrow" were *spelled* as "to-day" and "to-morrow."
That's not so long ago.
-YJ
meirman
<john...@frag.lineone.net> posted:
>Ian Hinson wrote:
>> In days of old (ie. when I was somewhat younger) I think I saw the
>> word "nett" spelt with 2 "t"s.
>> It would have been used the following context:
>>
>> * Weight 13oz nett. This meant weight excluding packaging.
>> * Nett price, which meant full price less discount.
>>
>> Is this spelling now defunct?
>> (if so, presumably by virtue of the English speaking world's continual
>> Americanisation, oops Americanization)
>> Or would that still be the correct spelling for that particular
>> meaning of the word "nett".
>
>If you are very old indeed you may have seen it. The most recent OED cite
>for the double t seems to be:
>
> << 1844 H. H. Wilson Brit. India III. 368 A pension proportioned to the
>nett revenue. >>
1844. And yet he blames the Americans. If we in the US only use on
t to spell net, it should be clear that the reason is that the British
put an import tax on t. This was the reason for the famous Boston T
Party, around 1774 or so. "Colonists", dressed as Indians so they
would not be recognized, unloaded ships that had not yet unloaded and
dumped the T in Boston Harbor. And we did without T or with less T.
We certainly could not waste it on a double-t in net.
>
>Though even Sam Pepys knew what it was supposed to be:
>
><< 1666–7 Pepys Diary 21 Jan., The net profits of which+will amount to
>3000l. >>
>
>'Net' in the sense of clean has a long history of variant spellings - nette,
>nett, neth, nete et al
>
>Well done on correcting yourself on 'Americanization' by the way. As you
>obviously realised in time, OED doesn't recognise 'Americanisation'. It
>cites no less an authority than the Times:
>
>1860 Times 12 Apr. 8/2 This Americanization is represented to us as the
>greatest of calamities.
s/ meirman If you are emailing me please
say if you are posting the same response.
Born west of Pittsburgh Pa. 10 years
Indianapolis, 7 years
Chicago, 6 years
Brooklyn NY 12 years
Baltimore 20 years
meirman
<spef...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> posted:
>On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 07:02:49 GMT, the renowned "Ian Hinson"
><ppar...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>>In days of old (ie. when I was somewhat younger) I think I saw the word
>>"nett" spelt with 2 "t"s.
>>It would have been used the following context:
>>
>>* Weight 13oz nett. This meant weight excluding packaging.
>>* Nett price, which meant full price less discount.
>>
>>Is this spelling now defunct?
>>(if so, presumably by virtue of the English speaking world's continual
>>Americanisation, oops Americanization)
>>Or would that still be the correct spelling for that particular meaning of
>>the word "nett".
>
>I have not seen it for a while, but I have seen it used that way.
>
>Real estate ads sometimes show industrial rents as "net net net",
>which means a whole bunch of stuff will be added on. It would be more
>convenient if they could just write "nettt".
Sort of like duhduhdubya in web addresses.
>Best regards,
>Spehro Pefhany
John Dean
Some of them were born in the Americas and thus only semi-colonists.
After they dumped the T, wasn't it Boston Hartbor?
