Antimony - Antinomy
Paul Pfalzner
PM Pfalzner
Richard Fontana
> Can anyone show how these two words are used correctly?
Yes, by using a dictionary, which will give their quite different
meanings.
Richard
Lars Eighner
In our last episode <836un3$p56$2...@freenet9.carleton.ca>,
the lovely and talented ai...@freenet.carleton.ca (Paul Pfalzner)
broadcast on alt.usage.english:
| Can anyone show how these two words are used correctly?
Antimony is an element. "Some semiconductors are doped with antimony."
Antinomy is a paradox or the tension between contradictory
or conflicting principles. "The speaker seem powerless to deal
with the antinomy of the need to conserve natural resources and
the economic benefits of industrial production."
--
Lars Eighner 700 Hearn #101 Austin TX 78703 eig...@io.com
(512) 474-1920 (FAX answers 6th ring) http://www.io.com/%7Eeighner/
bookstore: http://www.io.com/%7Eeighner/bookstore/
A bartender is just a pharmacist with a limited inventory.
Mike Oliver
"Schainbaum, Robert" wrote:
> Here's the answer. Antimony is an element in the table of elements.
> A heavy metal, if I recall correctly. Very poisonous in small
> amounts.
No, I don't think it's a metal. It's in the same period
as sulfur and arsenic, IIRC. Might be a semimetal or
whatever the term is, like silicon (but silicon is also
a semiconductor, and I don't believe antimony is).
Richard Fontana
>Richard Fontana wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 14 Dec 1999, Paul Pfalzner wrote:
>>
>>
>> meanings.
>
>answer?
The AUE FAQ (Quod Vide) suggests that posters avoid posting "questions
that can be answered by simple reference to a dictionary". I think that
this is a reasonable suggestion, and it applies here, perhaps
especially because both of these words are not commonly used. If Paul
were to have asked about the difference in usage between "moral" and
"molar", I'd respond in the same way.
Richard
D. Spencer Hines
Bullseye!
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"I love the language, that soft bastard Latin, Which melts like kisses
from a female mouth." --- "Beppo [1818]" Stanza 44, George Noel Gordon,
Lord Byron [1788-1824]
"Richard Fontana" <rfon...@wesleyan.edu> wrote in message
news:slrn85ect4....@localhost.localdomain...
James Follett
D._Spence...@aya.yale.edu "D. Spencer Hines" writes:
>Vide infra postea.
>Bullseye!
What is? Post in sequence and your scoring will make sense.
Robert Lieblich
[standard reformatting of Hines posting:
Richard Fontana wrote:
<snip>
> | The AUE FAQ (Quod Vide) suggests that posters avoid posting "questions
> | that can be answered by simple reference to a dictionary". I think
> that
> | this is a reasonable suggestion, and it applies here, perhaps
> | especially because both of these words are not commonly used. If Paul
> | were to have asked about the difference in usage between "moral" and
> | "molar", I'd respond in the same way.
> Bullseye!
The AUE FAQ Intro A (Quod vide) suggests that posters put new material
at the bottom or intersperse it after the portions of the text to which
it responds. It also explains the reasoning behind the suggestion.
This document is available on the website www.go.to/aue.
Or do we ignore the parts of the FAQ we don'd like?
CS
M.J.Powell
<Robert.S...@Berlin.DE> writes
No, they're not.
Mike
--
M.J.Powell
Cissy . Thorpe
> > On Tue, 14 Dec 1999, Paul Pfalzner wrote
> > > Can anyone show how these two words are used correctly?
> > > Richard Fontana wrote:
> > Yes, by using a dictionary, which will give their quite different
> > meanings.
> On Wed, 15 Dec 1999, Schainbaum, Robert wrote:
> Bet that blast felt real good. Why not just say if you know the
> answer?
I believe, Robert, that Richard did exactly that - I have never felt that
it was the mission of this group to do what one could easily do by
reaching for just about any dictionary - just have a look at all early
posts. We also don't do homework.
My 2p
Cissy
R. A. Heindl
wrote:
>
>
>"Schainbaum, Robert" wrote:
>> Here's the answer. Antimony is an element in the table of elements.
>> A heavy metal, if I recall correctly. Very poisonous in small
>> amounts.
>
>No, I don't think it's a metal. It's in the same period
>as sulfur and arsenic, IIRC. Might be a semimetal or
>whatever the term is, like silicon (but silicon is also
>a semiconductor, and I don't believe antimony is).
According to my handbook, antimony is a metal. It's used in batteries
to harden the lead so the plates don't collapse. As an added bonus,
it helps confuse students trying to learn the periodic table -- its
symbol is "Sb".
--Ray Heindl
Stan Brown
(Paul Pfalzner) wrote in alt.usage.english:
> Can anyone show how these two words are used correctly?
Check their meanings in your dictionary, or in an on-line dictionary such
as the one listed below, and then post again if you can't understand. Be
sure to quote the definitions and say which part you don't understand;
we'll be happy to help.
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
http://www.mindspring.com/~brahms/
alt.usage.English intro and FAQs: http://go.to/aue
WWWebster online dictionary: http://www.m-w.com/mw/netdict.htm
more FAQs: http://www.mindspring.com/~brahms/faqget.htm
Mike Oliver
"Schainbaum, Robert" wrote:
> Then again, we don't take Hegel very
> seriously these days. Or Kant.
I kan, I just dont.
Paul Pfalzner
Since all know the difference, it strikes me as strange that in two
recent texts written by academics - even accredited philosophers - I
have seen in print the word "antimony" when it made no sense to refer to
a metal in the sentence.
Good for a.u.e. contributors! Perhaps proof readers need to read this
newsgroup. Or could it be the fault of spellchecker programs?
PM.
Lars Eighner
I investigated the spelling checker for WordPerfect 6.0c for
DOS and ShareSpell, a shareware spelling check. Both seemed
to recognize both words. However, since n and m are close
together on the QWERTY keyboard, I imagine that "antinony"
and "antimomy" are very likely typos which might be incorrectly
repaired with any spelling checker. As has been mentioned many
times on this group, the quality of copy editing today is not
what it once was. If a copy editor does not recognize "antinomy"
and changes it to "antimony" -- the sort of mindless "correction"
that is not uncommon in modern copyediting -- neither the
author nor the proof reader is very likely to detect the error.
The author is likely to "read" the word as he wrote it, and
the proofreader will be proofing against the copy, which the
copy editor has changed. The best chance of catching such an
error is when the author reads the edited copy, for here the
copy editor's changes are obvious. Unfortunately, authors
do not always get to review the edited copy and get only
page proofs.
--
Lars Eighner 700 Hearn #101 Austin TX 78703 eig...@io.com
(512) 474-1920 (FAX answers 6th ring) http://www.io.com/%7Eeighner/
bookstore: http://www.io.com/%7Eeighner/bookstore/
"Have you ever dated somebody because you were too lazy to commit suicide?"
Paul Pfalzner
Kurt Foster <kfo...@rmi.net> wrote in message
news:BKW54.4914$6c6.4...@den-news1.rmi.net...
> In <838ts7$jno$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca>, Paul Pfalzner
> <ai...@freenet.carleton.ca> said:
> [snip re "antimony" and "antinomy"]
> . Good for a.u.e. contributors! Perhaps proof readers need to read
this
> . newsgroup.
>
> Proof readers - or proofreaders? What are they? ;-)
>
I don't care as long as they are 90% proof!
But I do recognize my lapse here - and withdraw the space between f and
r.
It certainly indicates the depth of acuity present in this group.
PM
Robert Lieblich
>
> "M.J.Powell" wrote:
>
> > In article <38572C91...@Berlin.DE>, Schainbaum, Robert
> > <Robert.S...@Berlin.DE> writes
> > >
> > >> "Schainbaum, Robert" wrote:
> > >> > Here's the answer. Antimony is an element in the table of elements.
> > >> > A heavy metal, if I recall correctly. Very poisonous in small
> > >> > amounts.
> > >>
> > >> No, I don't think it's a metal. It's in the same period
> > >> as sulfur and arsenic, IIRC. Might be a semimetal or
> > >> whatever the term is, like silicon (but silicon is also
> > >> a semiconductor, and I don't believe antimony is).
> > >
> >
> > No, they're not.
>
Now, see here, this isn't a proper argument.
Bob Lieblich
Martin Ambuhl
Paul Pfalzner wrote:
>
> Can anyone show how these two words are used correctly?
Before studying the heavier semimetals, we shall explore the antinomies
of antimony.
--
Martin Ambuhl mam...@earthlink.net
What one knows is, in youth, of little moment; they know enough who
know how to learn. - Henry Adams
A thick skin is a gift from God. - Konrad Adenauer
__________________________________________________________
Fight spam now!
Get your free anti-spam service: http://www.brightmail.com
Michael West
Paul Pfalzner <ai...@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote in message
news:838ts7$jno$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
> Let me thank all those who responded to my query.
>
> Since all know the difference, it strikes me as strange that in two
> recent texts written by academics - even accredited philosophers - I
> have seen in print the word "antimony" when it made no sense to refer
to
> a metal in the sentence.
>
>
>
It would be helpful to notify the publishers and/or authors.
--
Michael West
Melbourne, Australia
Kurt Foster
<ai...@freenet.carleton.ca> said:
[snip re "antimony" and "antinomy"]
. newsgroup.
Proof readers - or proofreaders? What are they? ;-)
. Or could it be the fault of spellchecker programs?
No. A spellchecker only knows whether a word is correctly spelled -
i.e. is a word listed in its dictionary. It does NOT know whether it's
the *right* word. The writer is supposed to know that.
But once the belief is universal, that software lets you work without
having to understand what you're doing, then nobody reading a document
will notice a wrong word any more than whoever wrote it, and the whole
thing can be treated as a solved problem.
dave
is from Stibium. As you increase atomic weight on the right hand side
of the table, you become more metallic, so sulphur at the top of the
column is an insulator and non-metallic, while lower in the column the
heavier elements get progressively more metallic.
Antinomy went right past me, and didn't even wave.
Dave
Martin Ambuhl
"Schainbaum, Robert" wrote:
>
> Richard Fontana wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 14 Dec 1999, Paul Pfalzner wrote:
> >
> > > Can anyone show how these two words are used correctly?
> >
> > Yes, by using a dictionary, which will give their quite different
> > meanings.
> >
> > Richard
>
> Bet that blast felt real good. Why not just say if you know the
> answer?
>
> Here's the answer. Antimony is an element in the table of elements.
> A heavy metal, if I recall correctly.
It is a semimetal (5a). That and its four allotropic forms lead to its
antinomies. IOther 5a elements include nitrogen, phophorus, arsenic,
and bismuth.
With an atomic number of 51, antimony is mid-chart. It is getting into
heavy metal range.
Michael West
"Schainbaum, Robert" <Robert.S...@Berlin.DE> wrote in message
news:385860CD...@Berlin.DE...
> Michael West wrote:
>
> > Paul Pfalzner <ai...@freenet.carleton.ca> wrote in message
> > news:838ts7$jno$1...@freenet9.carleton.ca...
> > > Let me thank all those who responded to my query.
> > >
> > > Since all know the difference, it strikes me as strange that in
two
> > > recent texts written by academics - even accredited philosophers -
I
> > > have seen in print the word "antimony" when it made no sense to
refer
> > to
> > > a metal in the sentence.
> > >
this
> > >
> > > PM.
> > >
> >
> > It would be helpful to notify the publishers and/or authors.
>
Eh? Them who?
I mean if no one points out the errors, the publisher's production
standards are unlikely to improve. The problem isn't that a writer or
typesetter is making the error, but rather that no one else is catching
it.
MW
Michael West
"Robert Lieblich" <lieb...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:385865...@erols.com...
> Schainbaum, Robert wrote:
> >
> > "M.J.Powell" wrote:
> >
> > > In article <38572C91...@Berlin.DE>, Schainbaum, Robert
> > > <Robert.S...@Berlin.DE> writes
> > > >Mike Oliver wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> "Schainbaum, Robert" wrote:
elements.
small
> > > >> > amounts.
> > > >>
> > > >> No, I don't think it's a metal. It's in the same period
> > > >> as sulfur and arsenic, IIRC. Might be a semimetal or
> > > >> whatever the term is, like silicon (but silicon is also
> > > >> a semiconductor, and I don't believe antimony is).
> > > >
> > > >Whatever. Antinomies are more interesting anyway.
> > >
> > > No, they're not.
> >
> > Yes they are.
>
> Now, see here, this isn't a proper argument.
Is too.
Robert Lieblich
>
> Michael West wrote:
<snip>
> > I mean if no one points out the errors, the publisher's production
> > standards are unlikely to improve. The problem isn't that a writer or
> > typesetter is making the error, but rather that no one else is catching
> > it.
> >
> > MW
>
> And no one consulted a dictionary?
And no one noticed the error. I mean, RS, not even *I* catch all errors
on proofreading. (Do you?) If you don't even *see* the error, no
dictionary will help you.
Bob Lieblich
Skitt
I'm sorry, the five minutes is up.
--
Skitt (on Florida's Space Coast) http://i.am/skitt/
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Matti Lamprhey
> >
>
> But I do recognize my lapse here - and withdraw the space between f and r.
And, in deference to another thread, I hope you made good use of it between
the 0 and the %. We must keep up our Standards.
Matti
N.Mitchum
------
> > I don't care as long as they are 90% proof!
Did anyone call the writer on his "90% proof"? If I correctly
remember my rule of thumb, 90 proof actually comes to about 45%.
----NM
D. Spencer Hines
That was a savory paragraph on Real American Pumpkin Pie. It's worth
repeating:
---------------------------------------
Acquired? Rubbish! What ever can you mean by "acquired"? I tell
you, the Real American Pumpkin Pie is as irresistible and
soul-stirring as the music of the spheres. It's a force of
nature, an absolute, the paragon of perfect taste, the lodestar of
cuisine. Once tasted, in fact, it spoils the honoree -- all other
foods seem pale and tasteless by comparison, and he can think of
nothing else but his next slice of heaven.
------
> Who is going to post their recipe? I depend on the commercial
>"pumpkin pie spice" which of course you cannot buy outside the US
Nurse Ratched
Ah, well, now the truth comes out. You've been cheating with
pumpkin pie spice. Non-American may not be familiar with this
blend of cinnamon, ginger, nutmeg, allspice, and cloves that's
sold to the same people who prepare family dinners using canned
soup as their sauce base. It's fine for sprinkling on mashed
squash (another thread), but should be kept out of RAPPs.
Nobody can wonder that your Dutch friends disliked it.
----NM [N. Mitchum]
------------------------------------
RAPP is indeed a rare delicacy. Moet et Chandon Champagne goes well
with it, but so does a glass of milk.
RAPP is classless.
--
D. Spencer Hines
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
"London, that great cesspool into which all the loungers of the Empire
are irresistibly drained." Sir Arthur Ignatius Conan Doyle [1859-1930],
"A Study In Scarlet" [1887]
"N.Mitchum" <aj...@lafn.org> wrote in message
news:38593D...@lafn.org...
Michael Hardy
> "Schainbaum, Robert" wrote:
> > Here's the answer. Antimony is an element in the table of elements.
> > A heavy metal, if I recall correctly. Very poisonous in small
> > amounts.
>
> No, I don't think it's a metal. It's in the same period
> as sulfur and arsenic, IIRC. Might be a semimetal or
So why don't we discuss the difference between the words
"semimetal" and "sentimental"? - Mike Hardy
--
Michael Hardy
ha...@math.mit.edu
http://www-math.mit.edu/~hardy
Charles Riggs
> Mike Oliver wrote:
>
>> "Schainbaum, Robert" wrote:
>> > Here's the answer. Antimony is an element in the table of elements.
>> > A heavy metal, if I recall correctly. Very poisonous in small
>> > amounts.
>>
>> No, I don't think it's a metal. It's in the same period
>> as sulfur and arsenic, IIRC. Might be a semimetal or
This being an English language usage group, I'm surprised no-one in
this discussion has yet given a definition for "metal" as they argue
back and forth on whether antimony qualifies or not.
I'll give it a stab and it is probably wrong: a metal is a substance
which is a good conductor of electricity due to the availability of
free electrons in the element's outer shell.
Charles Riggs
Jody Bilyeu
> Let me thank all those who responded to my query.
>
> Since all know the difference, it strikes me as strange
that in two
> recent texts written by academics - even accredited
philosophers - I
> have seen in print the word "antimony" when it made no
sense to refer to
> a metal in the sentence.
>
> Good for a.u.e. contributors! Perhaps proof readers need
to read this
> newsgroup. Or could it be the fault of spellchecker
programs?
I've been getting a good spellchecker gaffe in some papers:
"aquatinted" for "acquainted". It's the writer's lack of a
"c" that does it, I'm sure. At any rate, it's usually used
in situations like this: "They thought they should sit down
and get aquatinted."
An accidental euphemism, yes--but for what? The mind
reels--well, shifts slightly. Many seconds of amusement.
Cheers,
Jody
Donna Richoux
> I've been getting a good spellchecker gaffe in some papers:
> "aquatinted" for "acquainted". It's the writer's lack of a
> "c" that does it, I'm sure. At any rate, it's usually used
> in situations like this: "They thought they should sit down
> and get aquatinted."
Good one! I've been saving examples of various sorts of errors reported
here, mondegreens, misles, and mishy-phens, but I only have one sighting
in this spelling-checker category, and no snappy name for them.
Subject: Re: Spelling Checker Hazard (was Re: I before E)
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 1996 11:20:50 GMT
d...@crl.com (David A. Kaye) wrote:
>This happened a few weeks ago to the menu of a well-to-do restaurant
>here in San Francisco. The menu was spell-checked, printed, and a copy
>displayed in the window of the restaurant (as is the custom here).
>Nobody noticed that the spell-checker turned "warmed spring salad
>greens with prosciuto" into "warmed spring salad greens with
>prostitutes."
Oh, people all the time report that their spelling checkers give funny
results, and there's that "Owed to a Spieling Chukka," but all that's
different than finding a mistake published.
I saw a mishy-phen the other day, in the New Yorker issue about the
Digital Age: acade-mics.
--
Best --- Donna Richoux
Rich Ulrich
wrote:
[ ... ]
> I saw a mishy-phen the other day, in the New Yorker issue about the
> Digital Age: acade-mics.
Published in the NY Times, Wed. Dec 8, Books of the Times, review of
Robert Conquest's "Reflections on a ravaged century."
The review opens --
Robert Conquest calls Part I of his
new book "Mindslaughter," which is
a suggestive and potent neologism if
ever there was one.
The review closes --
... In this sense, they are illus-
trations of Mr Conquest's own tem-
perament, his effort over many
years to hammer out a humanistic
understanding, so that "minds-
laughter" won't happen again.
--
Rich Ulrich, wpi...@pitt.edu
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
Einde O'Callaghan
subeditors as an example of how not to do it.
--
eo'c