Protractor accent
Mark Brader
scale for measuring angles), I learned to accent the word on the second
syllable -- pro-TRAK-ter, like "retractor". I probably got this from
one or both of my parents, who were from Britain.
When we actually started using them in school (around 1970 in Ontario,
Canada), though, the usual pronunciation among students had the first
syllable accented, PRO-trak-ter. I suppose the teachers must have said
it the same way -- I don't remember them discussing the pronunciation.
I just checked with my wife and indeed she considers PRO-trak-ter the
normal pronunciation.
My 1979 edition RHU1 shows only the first pronunciation.
Comments?
--
Mark Brader, | "There is no silver bullet, because not every
Toronto, m...@vex.net | problem is a werewolf." -- Damian Conway
My text in this article is in the public domain.
franzi
> When I first learned the word "protractor" (for a typically semicircular
> scale for measuring angles), I learned to accent the word on the second
> syllable -- pro-TRAK-ter, like "retractor". Â I probably got this from
> one or both of my parents, who were from Britain.
>
> When we actually started using them in school (around 1970 in Ontario,
> Canada), though, the usual pronunciation among students had the first
> syllable accented, PRO-trak-ter. Â I suppose the teachers must have said
> it the same way -- I don't remember them discussing the pronunciation.
> I just checked with my wife and indeed she considers PRO-trak-ter the
> normal pronunciation.
>
> My 1979 edition RHU1 shows only the first pronunciation.
>
> Comments?
Second syllable. I learnt the word in England, at school. I don't
imagine I ever discussed the instrument with my parents.
To accent the first syllable would seem to be an overt differentiation
from other -tractor words also accented on the first syllable; but I
can't think of any. Except that broken-down farm vehicle, the ex-
tractor. Or the lovely and talented X-factor-tractor?
--
franzi
Prai Jei
continuum:
> When I first learned the word "protractor" (for a typically semicircular
> scale for measuring angles), I learned to accent the word on the second
> syllable -- pro-TRAK-ter, like "retractor". I probably got this from
> one or both of my parents, who were from Britain.
Never heard it that way over here, accent always on the A.
Sure puts a different angle on it :)
--
ξ:) Proud to be curly
Interchange the alphabetic letter groups to reply
Stan Brown
>
> When I first learned the word "protractor" (for a typically semicircular
> scale for measuring angles), I learned to accent the word on the second
> syllable -- pro-TRAK-ter, like "retractor". I probably got this from
> one or both of my parents, who were from Britain.
When I needed to use one of those instruments, in junior high and
high school, its name was uniformly accented on the second syllable.
(This was suburban Baltimore, Maryland, in the 1960s.)
Accenting the first syllable sounds wrong to me, about on a par with
"BO-kay" for a bunch of flowers.
AHD4 gives two pronunciations: "pro-trak't@r, pr@-". An accented
first syllable isn't even listed as a variant.
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Shikata ga nai...
Jerry Friedman
> When I first learned the word "protractor" (for a typically semicircular
> scale for measuring angles), I learned to accent the word on the second
> syllable -- pro-TRAK-ter, like "retractor". Â I probably got this from
> one or both of my parents, who were from Britain.
>
> When we actually started using them in school (around 1970 in Ontario,
> Canada), though, the usual pronunciation among students had the first
> syllable accented, PRO-trak-ter. Â I suppose the teachers must have said
> it the same way -- I don't remember them discussing the pronunciation.
> I just checked with my wife and indeed she considers PRO-trak-ter the
> normal pronunciation.
>
> My 1979 edition RHU1 shows only the first pronunciation.
>
> Comments?
I've only ever heard "PRO-trak-ter", with a secondary accent on the
second syllable, like (the usual American pronunciation of)
"contractor".
/'proU,tr&ktR/
--
Jerry Friedman
John O'Flaherty
>When I first learned the word "protractor" (for a typically semicircular
>scale for measuring angles), I learned to accent the word on the second
>syllable -- pro-TRAK-ter, like "retractor". I probably got this from
>one or both of my parents, who were from Britain.
>
>When we actually started using them in school (around 1970 in Ontario,
>Canada), though, the usual pronunciation among students had the first
>syllable accented, PRO-trak-ter. I suppose the teachers must have said
>it the same way -- I don't remember them discussing the pronunciation.
>I just checked with my wife and indeed she considers PRO-trak-ter the
>normal pronunciation.
>
>My 1979 edition RHU1 shows only the first pronunciation.
>
>Comments?
I always accented on the second syllable (Cleveland, Ohio, ca
1955-1960).
--
John
Nick Spalding
on Sun, 23 May 2010 17:29:46 -0500:
> When I first learned the word "protractor" (for a typically semicircular
> scale for measuring angles), I learned to accent the word on the second
> syllable -- pro-TRAK-ter, like "retractor". I probably got this from
> one or both of my parents, who were from Britain.
>
> When we actually started using them in school (around 1970 in Ontario,
> Canada), though, the usual pronunciation among students had the first
> syllable accented, PRO-trak-ter. I suppose the teachers must have said
> it the same way -- I don't remember them discussing the pronunciation.
> I just checked with my wife and indeed she considers PRO-trak-ter the
> normal pronunciation.
>
> My 1979 edition RHU1 shows only the first pronunciation.
>
> Comments?
Count me in with the second-syllable group. Incidentally the same goes
for 'contractor'.
--
Nick Spalding
BrE/IrE
John Holmes
> When I first learned the word "protractor" (for a typically
> semicircular scale for measuring angles), I learned to accent the
> word on the second syllable -- pro-TRAK-ter, like "retractor". I
> probably got this from one or both of my parents, who were from
> Britain.
>
> When we actually started using them in school (around 1970 in Ontario,
> Canada), though, the usual pronunciation among students had the first
> syllable accented, PRO-trak-ter. I suppose the teachers must have
> said it the same way -- I don't remember them discussing the
> pronunciation. I just checked with my wife and indeed she considers
> PRO-trak-ter the normal pronunciation.
>
> My 1979 edition RHU1 shows only the first pronunciation.
>
> Comments?
Second syllable stress is the only way I have ever heard it.
How do the first-syllable-stressers say "protracted" (as in a protracted
silence)?
--
Regards
John
for mail: my initials plus a u e
at tpg dot com dot au
Jerry Friedman
The stress in ClevelandE had retreated by about 15 years later.
--
Jerry Friedman
Jerry Friedman
Stressed on the second syllable. (I think I wondered in my childhood
whether a device for measuring and drawing angles had anything to do
with making longer.) Likewise someone can conTRACT mumps, but a
person who builds a house is a CONtractor, everywhere I've been in
America.
--
Jerry Friedman
Evan Kirshenbaum
With the accent on the second syllable. Just like I say "The
contractor [first syllable] contracted [second syllable] for the job."
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Pardon him, Theodotus. He is a
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |barbarian and thinks that the
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |customs of his tribe and island are
|the laws of nature.
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com |
(650)857-7572 | George Bernard Shaw
Maria Conlon
Probably with the stress on the second syllable. However, I don't recall
ever saying the word out loud. (And the noun, protractor -- as used in
math classes -- was pronounced with a first-syllable stress in my
Michigan schools.
By the way: In my AmE brand of English, /contracted/ can have either a
first or second syllable stress.
First syllable stress as in "the job was CONtracted to ("let out to,"
"sent to," or "given to") a CONtractor. Generally for anything based on
a contract (noun).
Second syllable stress: Generally anything to do with the verb
/contract/ (shrink, more or less) or with the noun /contraction/ (ex:
what a mother has when giving birth).
--
Maria Conlon,
Resident of southeast Michigan, near Detroit; native of east Tennessee.
Peter Moylan
think of a situation where I would use first-syllable stress, but the
only example that springs to mind is "compost".
--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.
Glenn Knickerbocker
> When we actually started using them in school (around 1970 in Ontario,
> Canada), though, the usual pronunciation among students had the first
> syllable accented, PRO-trak-ter.
That's the only pronunciation I ever recall hearing for the measuring
instrument in New York and Texas. A pro-TRACT-or would be a muscle.
�R
John Varela
> When I first learned the word "protractor" (for a typically semicircular
> scale for measuring angles), I learned to accent the word on the second
> syllable -- pro-TRAK-ter, like "retractor". I probably got this from
> one or both of my parents, who were from Britain.
>
> When we actually started using them in school (around 1970 in Ontario,
> Canada), though, the usual pronunciation among students had the first
> syllable accented, PRO-trak-ter. I suppose the teachers must have said
> it the same way -- I don't remember them discussing the pronunciation.
> I just checked with my wife and indeed she considers PRO-trak-ter the
> normal pronunciation.
>
> My 1979 edition RHU1 shows only the first pronunciation.
>
> Comments?
Second syllable, New Orleans public schools, 1940s.
--
John Varela
Cece
>
> - Show quoted text -
PRO-tractor, pro-TRAC-ted. In INdianapolis, 1960s.
Garrett Wollman
Mark Brader <m...@vex.net> wrote:
>I learned to accent the word on the second syllable -- pro-TRAK-ter,
>[T]he usual pronunciation among students [in Ontario public schools]
>had the first syllable accented, PRO-trak-ter.
>Comments?
Always accented on the first syllable for me (Burlington, Vermont,
parochial schools).
-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft
wol...@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program
Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption
my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993
Skitt
> PRO-tractor, pro-TRAC-ted. In INdianapolis, 1960s.
Same here, and I agree with all that Maria said. In San Jose, early 1950s.
--
Skitt (SF Bay Area)
http://come.to/skitt
HVS
> When I first learned the word "protractor" (for a typically semicircular
> scale for measuring angles), I learned to accent the word on the second
> syllable -- pro-TRAK-ter, like "retractor". I probably got this from
> one or both of my parents, who were from Britain.
>
> When we actually started using them in school (around 1970 in Ontario,
> Canada), though, the usual pronunciation among students had the first
> syllable accented, PRO-trak-ter. I suppose the teachers must have said
> it the same way -- I don't remember them discussing the pronunciation.
> I just checked with my wife and indeed she considers PRO-trak-ter the
> normal pronunciation.
>
> My 1979 edition RHU1 shows only the first pronunciation.
>
> Comments?
Maybe it's a southern Ontario thing?
I grew up in Ottawa (from age 4 to 22 -- kindergarten through 4th year
university -- with parents who grew up in Winnipeg), and AFAICR I can
honestly say I've never heard it with first-syllable stress.
--
Cheers, Harvey
CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed
John O'Flaherty
I always said that India-nA-polis ...
--
John
R H Draney
Ditto, Southern California 1960s, New Mexico 1970s, and Seattle area a year and
a half spanning the transition between the two decades....r
--
"Oy! A cat made of lead cannot fly."
- Mark Brader declaims a basic scientific principle
annily
I probably used to agree with that, but I think I find myself tending to
use first-syllable stress these days, due no doubt to the influence of
US TV.
Macquarie actually lists the first-syllable stress on "contractor"
first, but not at all for "protractor", which agrees with my usage.
--
Long-time resident of Adelaide, South Australia,
which may or may not influence my opinions.
Robert Bannister
What about the "getting smaller" meaning?
--
Rob Bannister
Maria Conlon
Isn't that what "shrink" means? (Or am I misunderstanding your
question?)
Maria Conlon
Robert Bannister
> Robert Bannister wrote:
>
>>> Second syllable stress: Generally anything to do with the verb
>>> /contract/ (shrink, more or less) or with the noun /contraction/ (ex:
>>> what a mother has when giving birth).
>>
>> What about the "getting smaller" meaning?
>
> Isn't that what "shrink" means? (Or am I misunderstanding your question?)
>
> Maria Conlon
Whoops! I think I skipped half a sentence. I grovel in self-deprecation.
--
Rob Bannister
Bohgosity BumaskiL
Canadian pronunciation is more natural. The only rule I learned about stress
is one I formed from approximate analyis on my own: "acCESS" was the first
word that I began to stress at the end when it was a verb; as a noun,
"ACcess", just like everybody else.
Since "protractor" is never a verb, nor an adjective, nor an adverb, it
would naturally (outside of poetry) have stress at its beginning.
Typically, nouns on the first syllable, adjectives and adverbs on the middle
(if any), and verbs on the third or end. So, I think Canadian pronunciation
is more natural.
annily
> Mark Brader noticed different stress on syllables in Britain than Canada.
>
> Canadian pronunciation is more natural. The only rule I learned about stress
> is one I formed from approximate analyis on my own: "acCESS" was the first
> word that I began to stress at the end when it was a verb; as a noun,
> "ACcess", just like everybody else.
>
In Australia, "access" is always stressed on the first syllable IME,
regardless of whether it's a verb or noun. I've never heard it stressed
on the second.
annily
> Mark Brader noticed different stress on syllables in Britain than Canada.
>
> (if any), and verbs on the third or end. So, I think Canadian pronunciation
> is more natural.
>
>
three-syllable word, regardless of its part of speech.
James Hogg
Examples of three-syllable words in your sentence:
natural
syllable
regardless
--
James
Stan Brown
> Whoops! I think I skipped half a sentence. I grovel in self-deprecation.
I deprecate that use of "self-deprecation". I know it has won out,
but every time I see or hear it, I also hear Fowler defining
"deprecate" as "do the reverse of pray for". the notion of warding
oneself off by prayer gives me the shudders.
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Shikata ga nai...
Stan Brown
> Mark Brader noticed different stress on syllables in Britain than Canada.
>
> Canadian pronunciation is more natural.
Surely you can see that each group's pronunciation is more natural to
that group and less natural to other groups?
Stan Brown
Ditto for the US and what I've (never) heard. I'm skeptical about
"acCESS" in Canada.
Peter Moylan
"pronunciation".
annily
Well, "natural" is almost two syllables in Strine, but one out of three
isn't bad :) But I did say "more natural", which is not the same as the
way I pronounce them in practice.
CDB
> annily wrote:
>> Bohgosity BumaskiL wrote:
>>> Mark Brader noticed different stress on syllables in Britain than
>>> Canada.
>>>
>>> Canadian pronunciation is more natural. The only rule I learned
>>> about stress is one I formed from approximate analyis on my own:
>>> "acCESS" was the first word that I began to stress at the end
>>> when it was a verb; as a noun, "ACcess", just like everybody
>>> else.
>>
>> In Australia, "access" is always stressed on the first syllable
>> IME, regardless of whether it's a verb or noun. I've never heard
>> it stressed on the second.
>
> Ditto for the US and what I've (never) heard. I'm skeptical about
> "acCESS" in Canada.
>
(Ottawa, late 1950s). On the other hand, exCESS of sorrow laughs.
Donna Richoux
Oh we poot the ac-CENT
Upon the wrong syl-LAB-le
When we si-i-i-i-i-ing
A tropical song.
Uncle Ben
>
> - Show quoted text -
It is said in the US that the speech of little educated, isolated folk
in the hills and mountains (socalled "hillbillies") have speech that
echoes earlier times, and now considered substandard. A
characteristic is the frequent accentuation of first syllables, in
contrast to the current standard. Examples are GUItar. INsur'nce,
PROtractor, DEtails.
Can anyone confirm that this reflects a characteristic of older
english?
Uncle Ben
Adam Funk
> On Wed, 26 May 2010 00:21:11 -0600, Bohgosity BumaskiL wrote:
>> Mark Brader noticed different stress on syllables in Britain than Canada.
>>
>> Canadian pronunciation is more natural.
>
> Surely you can see that each group's pronunciation is more natural to
> that group and less natural to other groups?
Maybe he means "more internally consistent, therefore easier to learn,
therefore more natural-seeming"?
--
I worry that 10 or 15 years from now, [my daughter] will come to me
and say 'Daddy, where were you when they took freedom of the press
away from the Internet?' [Mike Godwin, EFF http://www.eff.org/ ]
franzi
in very recent times? They are still first-syllable stressed by me,
but the rest of the world seems to have changed to second-syllable.
But I have also been struck by stress or accent moving forwards to the
first syllables of words during recent years. 'Research' is one
example. If the sun were not so far over the yardarm, I might remember
others.
--
franzi
Jerry Friedman
wrote:
COMponent (one I dislike), FInance.
"DEtails" is standard in Britain, I think.
> > Can anyone confirm that this reflects a characteristic of older
> > english?
I think it's a modern development, with country people leading the
way. See "recessive accent" in R. L. Trask's /Dictionary of Phonetics
and Phonology/.
http://books.google.com/books?id=wHBf5SXUUkUC&pg=PA302#v=onepage&q&f=false
> I can't. Nevertheless, how do you feel about 'harrass' and 'kilometre'
> in very recent times? They are still first-syllable stressed by me,
> but the rest of the world seems to have changed to second-syllable.
I say "KILometer", but that's very unusual in America. I think the
usual pronunciation is influenced by "thermometer".
I suspect our common pronunciation of "harass" comes from Dorsett's
Fallacy: that you should accent a syllable that ends in a double
letter.
> But I have also been struck by stress or accent moving forwards to the
> first syllables of words during recent years. 'Research' is one
> example. If the sun were not so far over the yardarm, I might remember
> others.
Same principle as the ones Ben mentioned, and as an American, I can
only say, "You're welcome."
As I mentioned above, linguists know this as "recessive accent", so
they think the motion is backwards, not forwards. We've done this
stuff with "move the deadline back", which I always think means "make
it earlier".
--
Jerry Friedman
Peter Moylan
>> I can't. Nevertheless, how do you feel about 'harrass' and 'kilometre'
>> in very recent times? They are still first-syllable stressed by me,
>> but the rest of the world seems to have changed to second-syllable.
>
> I say "KILometer", but that's very unusual in America. I think the
> usual pronunciation is influenced by "thermometer".
The rule I hear used for those "meter" words is that second-syllable
stress is used for measuring instruments, and first-syllable stress is
used for metric units. (Thus, KILometre is a distance, while kilOMeter
is a device for measuring kills.) That's among educated Australians. For
the general population it could go either way. Similarly, "harass" can
go either way.
Americans probably get less exposure to metric units than the rest of
the world, and this could influence the pronunciation.
> I suspect our common pronunciation of "harass" comes from Dorsett's
> Fallacy: that you should accent a syllable that ends in a double
> letter.
Which means that those who know how to pronounce it have trouble
remembering how to spell it.
>> But I have also been struck by stress or accent moving forwards to the
>> first syllables of words during recent years. 'Research' is one
>> example. If the sun were not so far over the yardarm, I might remember
>> others.
ReSEARCH means looking for new things or ideas. REEsearch means
searching again for things that have already been discovered. I used to
get offended when anyone spoke of my research as REEsearch.
Robert Bannister
> On Wed, 26 May 2010 08:44:45 +0800, Robert Bannister wrote:
>
>> Whoops! I think I skipped half a sentence. I grovel in self-deprecation.
>
> I deprecate that use of "self-deprecation". I know it has won out,
> but every time I see or hear it, I also hear Fowler defining
> "deprecate" as "do the reverse of pray for". the notion of warding
> oneself off by prayer gives me the shudders.
>
One of those words I had never looked up. At the back of mind, I think I
had it linked with the unrelated "appreciate".
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
If we are just doing opinions, then I think it is unnatural to stress
most prefixes.
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
> On Wed, 26 May 2010 00:21:11 -0600, Bohgosity BumaskiL wrote:
>> Mark Brader noticed different stress on syllables in Britain than Canada.
>>
>> Canadian pronunciation is more natural.
>
> Surely you can see that each group's pronunciation is more natural to
> that group and less natural to other groups?
>
>
Make that individuals rather than groups, and you've hit the nail on the
head.
--
Rob Bannister
Evan Kirshenbaum
> Jerry Friedman wrote:
>> On May 26, 2:31 pm, franzi <et.in.arcadia.fra...@googlemail.com>
>> wrote:
>
>>> I can't. Nevertheless, how do you feel about 'harrass' and
>>> 'kilometre' in very recent times? They are still first-syllable
>>> stressed by me, but the rest of the world seems to have changed to
>>> second-syllable.
>>
>> I say "KILometer", but that's very unusual in America. I think the
>> usual pronunciation is influenced by "thermometer".
>
> The rule I hear used for those "meter" words is that second-syllable
> stress is used for measuring instruments, and first-syllable stress
> is used for metric units. (Thus, KILometre is a distance, while
> kilOMeter is a device for measuring kills.) That's among educated
> Australians. For the general population it could go either
> way. Similarly, "harass" can go either way.
I suspect that Americans tend to have the opposite intuitions. With
first-syllable stress it sounds like a handy-dandy Kill-O-Meter, just
the thing for tallying up kills. Only $19.95 plus shipping and
handling.
It's among the less educated Americans, those least familiar with the
word, that I'd be least surprised to hear it.
> Americans probably get less exposure to metric units than the rest of
> the world, and this could influence the pronunciation.
Could be, but the models we get (in school and on the job) are pretty
consistent. If I hear it with first-syllable stress, I can pretty
much guarantee that it will be accompanied by an accent that says "not
of these lands".
>> I suspect our common pronunciation of "harass" comes from Dorsett's
>> Fallacy: that you should accent a syllable that ends in a double
>> letter.
>
> Which means that those who know how to pronounce it have trouble
> remembering how to spell it.
>
>>> But I have also been struck by stress or accent moving forwards to
>>> the first syllables of words during recent years. 'Research' is
>>> one example. If the sun were not so far over the yardarm, I might
>>> remember others.
>
> ReSEARCH means looking for new things or ideas. REEsearch means
> searching again for things that have already been discovered. I used to
> get offended when anyone spoke of my research as REEsearch.
As someone who works in a research lab, I can say that I don't get
offended either way, but I mostly hear and say it with first-syllable
stress, as a noun, verb, and adjective.
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Pardon him, Theodotus. He is a
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |barbarian and thinks that the
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |customs of his tribe and island are
|the laws of nature.
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com |
(650)857-7572 | George Bernard Shaw
Mark Brader
> If we are just doing opinions, then I think it is unnatural to stress
> most prefixes.
I take O-ffense at that. :-)
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "It is one thing to praise discipline, and another
m...@vex.net | to submit to it." -- Miguel de Cervantes, 1613
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
Where is your stress in "prefix"?
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Stan Brown
>
> Rob Bannister:
> > If we are just doing opinions, then I think it is unnatural to stress
> > most prefixes.
>
> I take O-ffense at that. :-)
Unless playing football, in which case it would be OFF-ense.
But seriously, do you normally stress the first syllable of
"offense"? For me it's always the second syllable. I assume the
variant pronunciation in football is to emphasize the distinction
from DEE-fense.
Speaking of defense, do you spell it with a C or an S? I
occasionally speak with employees of the Canadian armed services in
my job, and they never seem quite sure whether National Defense is
spelled that way or with a C.
Stan Brown
I don't disagree, but (a) I was responding to Bogosity's comment and
(b) I don't think it's wrong to speak of group pronunciation, since
most people learn to speak the way those around them speak.
Stan Brown
> As someone who works in a research lab, I can say that I don't get
> offended either way, but I mostly hear and say it with first-syllable
> stress, as a noun, verb, and adjective.
I don't work in a lab, but the first-syllable stress for me is
natural in all contexts. "re-SEARCH" sounds faintly foreign,
bringing o mind Tom Lehrer's fake-Russian accent in "Lobachevsky":
"Plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize,
only be sure always to call it, please, ... re-SEARCH."
R H Draney
Anybody who's making a collection of "the best of aue" should probably save that
one....r
--
"Oy! A cat made of lead cannot fly."
- Mark Brader declaims a basic scientific principle
Default User
"Evan Kirshenbaum" <kirsh...@hpl.hp.com> wrote in message
news:d3whvo...@hpl.hp.com...
> Peter Moylan <gro.nalyomp@retep> writes:
\
>> ReSEARCH means looking for new things or ideas. REEsearch means
>> searching again for things that have already been discovered. I used to
>> get offended when anyone spoke of my research as REEsearch.
>
> As someone who works in a research lab, I can say that I don't get
> offended either way, but I mostly hear and say it with first-syllable
> stress, as a noun, verb, and adjective.
I work in software R&D, which I say as "REEsearch and development". I think
I might say reSEARCH for the activities, but now I've thought about it too
much and I'm not sure.
Brian
Mark Brader
> > > If we are just doing opinions, then I think it is unnatural to stress
> > > most prefixes.
Mark Brader:
> > I take O-ffense at that. :-)
Stan Brown:
> Unless playing football, in which case it would be OFF-ense.
No, meant with a long O. I'm pretty sure I've heard both in a sports
context, though.
> But seriously, do you normally stress the first syllable of
> "offense"? For me it's always the second syllable. I assume the
> variant pronunciation in football is to emphasize the distinction
> from DEE-fense.
I'd say the first-syllable accent should be extended beyond football
to any similar context. Otherwise, yes, it's o-FFENSE.
> Speaking of defense, do you spell it with a C or an S? I
> occasionally speak with employees of the Canadian armed services in
> my job, and they never seem quite sure whether National Defense is
> spelled that way or with a C.
As a devout American speller, I spell it "defense". The government
spells it Department of National Defence. Which is a pity, because
if it was just "Department of Defence" then it would more perfectly
combine the American and British terms.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "We don't use clubs; they weren't invented here.
m...@vex.net | We use rocks." -- David Keldsen
My text in this article is in the public domain.
R H Draney
>
>Rob Bannister:
>> > > If we are just doing opinions, then I think it is unnatural to stress
>> > > most prefixes.
>
>Mark Brader:
>> > I take O-ffense at that. :-)
>
>Stan Brown:
>> Unless playing football, in which case it would be OFF-ense.
>
>No, meant with a long O. I'm pretty sure I've heard both in a sports
>context, though.
I've heard it in a Canadian context:
Teacher: "The only use of Ti Kwon Leep is self-defense. Do you know who said
that? Ki Lo Ni, the great teacher."
Student: "Yeah? Well, the best DEE-fense is a good OH-fense. You know who
said that? Mel, the cook on 'Alice'."
Robert Bannister
I believe that, over the years, I too have adopted the American
"REEsearch" for the noun at least most of the time, but I still stress
the second syllable of the verb.
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
> On Thu, 27 May 2010 08:55:09 +0800, Robert Bannister wrote:
>> Stan Brown wrote:
>>> On Wed, 26 May 2010 00:21:11 -0600, Bohgosity BumaskiL wrote:
>>>> Mark Brader noticed different stress on syllables in Britain than Canada.
>>>>
>>>> Canadian pronunciation is more natural.
>>> Surely you can see that each group's pronunciation is more natural to
>>> that group and less natural to other groups?
>> Make that individuals rather than groups, and you've hit the nail on the
>> head.
>
> I don't disagree, but (a) I was responding to Bogosity's comment and
> (b) I don't think it's wrong to speak of group pronunciation, since
> most people learn to speak the way those around them speak.
>
Of course I agree with you. I was simply suggesting that, despite the
broader framework of the group's pronunciation, individuals still have
their own idiosyncrasies. Or maybe they just put the most idiosyncratic
ones on TV.
* Spelling checker has prompted me to change my spelling to
"idiosyncrasies" instead of my original "-cracies" - at the moment, it
is looking very odd to me - as though it should be pronounced "crazies".
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
> Rob Bannister:
>> If we are just doing opinions, then I think it is unnatural to stress
>> most prefixes.
>
> I take O-ffense at that. :-)
Then I'll hide behind de fence.
--
Rob Bannister
Robert Bannister
Touch�.
--
Rob Bannister
Stan Brown
>
> BrE filted:
> >
> >On Thu, 27 May 2010 08:49:11 +0800, Robert Bannister
> ><rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>If we are just doing opinions, then I think it is unnatural to stress
> >>most prefixes.
> >
> >Where is your stress in "prefix"?
>
> Anybody who's making a collection of "the best of aue" should probably save that
> one....r
"Oh prefix, where is thy stress? Oh research, where is thy accent?"
Stan Brown
> As a devout American speller, I spell it "defense". The government
> spells it Department of National Defence. Which is a pity, because
> if it was just "Department of Defence" then it would more perfectly
> combine the American and British terms.
You mean, the way you call your House of Lords the Senate? :-)
Uncle Ben
As one who practiced the art for a career, I always say reSEARCH.
We are instructed by US governmental scientific authority to say
KILometer, to fit with CENTimeter and MILimeter. And yes, as someone
suggested above, a therMOMeter can be distinguished as an instrument,
not a unit of measurement, although I had not thought of it that way
before.
Is it still fashionable among our medical colleagues to say
SAUNTimeter, as if "centimeter" were French? Or were my medical
friends just pixillated (in the old sense having nothing to do with
photography)?
Uncle Ben
Peter Moylan
> * Spelling checker has prompted me to change my spelling to
> "idiosyncrasies" instead of my original "-cracies" - at the moment, it
> is looking very odd to me - as though it should be pronounced "crazies".
>
That's one of my most persistent spelling errors. I have to keep telling
myself that the word does not belong in the same family as democracy,
theocracy, plutocracy, hippocracy [*], etc.
[*]My spelling checker didn't like that one, but I think Swift would
have accepted it.
Mark Brader
>> As a devout American speller, I spell it "defense". The government
>> spells it Department of National Defence. Which is a pity, because
>> if it was just "Department of Defence" then it would more perfectly
>> combine the American and British terms.
> You mean, the way you call your House of Lords the Senate? :-)
Yep. And also the way we have a value-added sales tax, but don't include
it in the marked price of goods.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "Pleasant dreams!"
m...@vex.net | "I'll dream of Canada." -- THE SUSPECT
Peter Moylan
> Mark Brader:
>>> As a devout American speller, I spell it "defense". The government
>>> spells it Department of National Defence. Which is a pity, because
>>> if it was just "Department of Defence" then it would more perfectly
>>> combine the American and British terms.
>
> Stan Brown:
>> You mean, the way you call your House of Lords the Senate? :-)
>
> Yep. And also the way we have a value-added sales tax, but don't include
> it in the marked price of goods.
Ouch. If that happened in Australia, the seller would probably be
prosecuted for fraudulent advertising.
Jerry Friedman
...
> We are instructed by US governmental scientific authority to say
> KILometer, to fit with CENTimeter and MILimeter.
...
That's what I've heard, and it's why (_pace_ Evan) I
say /'kIl@,mit@r/, but I haven't been able to find the source. Do you
know where that instruction is?
--
Jerry Friedman
Garrett Wollman
Peter Moylan <gro.nalyomp@retep> wrote:
>Mark Brader wrote:
>> Yep. And also the way we have a value-added sales tax, but don't include
>> it in the marked price of goods.
>
>Ouch. If that happened in Australia, the seller would probably be
>prosecuted for fraudulent advertising.
In North America, it is generally mandatory to display pre-tax prices.
Since they vary widely (both in rate and in the types of goods and
services covered), requiring the tax to be included in advertised
prices would make national advertising impossible, so it will never
happen.
Exceptions abound, including (most commonly) vending machines.
I think it varies somewhat less in Canada, because there are only
fourteen taxing jurisdictions, at most two of which apply to any
purchase. (Unless some province has started to do local-option sales
taxes....) But even there, if you're a store in the Ottawa market,
for example, you don't want to have to advertise different prices
for Ontario (GST+PST) and Quebec (GST+TVQ).
But in the combined statistical area where I live, the retail sales
tax rate varies from 0% (NH), to 5% (VT, RI, ME), to 6% (CT), to 6.25%
(MA). In the five states that have sales taxes, the rules are
different in each state as to which goods and services are subject to
the tax.
-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft
wol...@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program
Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption
my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993
Mark Brader
>>> And also the way we have a value-added sales tax, but don't include
>>> it in the marked price of goods.
Peter Moylan:
>> Ouch. If that happened in Australia, the seller would probably be
>> prosecuted for fraudulent advertising.
Garrett Wollman:
> In North America, it is generally mandatory to display pre-tax prices.
True.
> Since they vary widely (both in rate and in the types of goods and
> services covered), requiring the tax to be included in advertised
> prices would make national advertising impossible...
False. What it would make impossible is national advertising of the
same price everywhere with the seller receiving the same amount of it
everywhere.
> so it will never happen.
So long as government accepts business's desire for misleadingly low
advertised prices, yes.
> Exceptions abound...
True. Here's a cute one I discovered accidentally only a couple of
years ago. If you buy stamps in Canada, 5% GST is added to the price
-- *unless* you go to a post office, buy at least $5 worth, and
immediately use them for mail to destinations outside of Canada.
--
Mark Brader "'Taxpayer' includes any person
Toronto whether or not liable to pay tax."
m...@vex.net -- Income Tax Act of Canada, s.248(1)
tony cooper
wrote:
>Mark Brader wrote:
>> Mark Brader:
>>>> As a devout American speller, I spell it "defense". The government
>>>> spells it Department of National Defence. Which is a pity, because
>>>> if it was just "Department of Defence" then it would more perfectly
>>>> combine the American and British terms.
>>
>> Stan Brown:
>>> You mean, the way you call your House of Lords the Senate? :-)
>>
>> Yep. And also the way we have a value-added sales tax, but don't include
>> it in the marked price of goods.
>
>Ouch. If that happened in Australia, the seller would probably be
>prosecuted for fraudulent advertising.
It's been explained many times here, but we *can't* include the sales
tax amount in advertising. The tax amount depends on where you buy
the product.
If Wal-Mart advertises a product for $100, I know there will be a
sales tax added. However, that tax amount will be $6.00, $6.50, or
$7.00 depending on which Wal-Mart I go to. Sales tax in Florida is
6%, but counties can add an additional amount to the state rate. I
can conveniently shop in any one of three counties.
There can be an "ouch" for foreign tourists, but all Americans know
that sales tax will be added.
Drifting slightly...on my recent trip up to Indiana, the motel bills
were always at least 10% higher than the advertised rate of the room.
The advertised rate did not include state and city taxes.
On another tax note, I just purchased an airline ticket for my wife to
fly up to Rockford, Illinois for a funeral. The price was:
Airfare: $139.98
Segment fee: $7.40
PFC: $6.50
911 Security: $5.00
Prepaid Bags: $40.00
Convenience fee: $14.99
TOTAL: $213.87
The "convenience fee" is a charge for booking the ticket!. The PFC
fee is "passenger facility charge" for using the airport!
It would have been another $19.98 to pre-choose her seat on both legs.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Garrett Wollman
Mark Brader <m...@vex.net> wrote:
>> [I wrote:]
>> Since they vary widely (both in rate and in the types of goods and
>> services covered), requiring the tax to be included in advertised
>> prices would make national advertising impossible...
>
>False. What it would make impossible is national advertising of the
>same price everywhere with the seller receiving the same amount of it
>everywhere.
That's what "national advertising" means. The retailer is not going
to change its prices on the basis of what the local sales tax happens
to be in every market (or, worst case, every city and every county) on
the country -- their costs and competitive position are the same
thoughout wide swaths of territory. The notion is ridiculous.
>> so it will never happen.
>
>So long as government accepts business's desire for misleadingly low
>advertised prices, yes.
Nothing misleading about it. Everyone knows (or is deemed to know)
the rate of sales tax that applies in their locality, and the vast
majority of retail purchases are made by individuals near where they
live. An examination of their receipt shows exactly how much tax they
paid, which merchants like as it helps keep pressure on the
legislature to limit the level of taxation.
Stan Brown
> theocracy, plutocracy, hippocracy [*], etc.
>
> [*]My spelling checker didn't like that one, but I think Swift would
> have accepted it.
For a mythical land ruled by horses?
Peter Moylan
> On Fri, 28 May 2010 13:56:51 +1000, Peter Moylan wrote:
>
>> theocracy, plutocracy, hippocracy [*], etc.
>>
>> [*]My spelling checker didn't like that one, but I think Swift would
>> have accepted it.
>
> For a mythical land ruled by horses?
>
Houyhnhnmocracy.
(Now /there's/ a word whose spelling I had to look up.)
I'm trying to remember whether the original yahoos could speak. I don't
think they could.
A Google search on "Yahoo Swift" returns a number of pointers to
latter-day yahoos discussing a singer called Swift.
Peter Moylan
> On Fri, 28 May 2010 18:22:55 +1000, Peter Moylan <gro.nalyomp@retep>
> wrote:
>
>> Mark Brader wrote:
>>> Mark Brader:
>>>>> As a devout American speller, I spell it "defense". The government
>>>>> spells it Department of National Defence. Which is a pity, because
>>>>> if it was just "Department of Defence" then it would more perfectly
>>>>> combine the American and British terms.
>>>
>>> Stan Brown:
>>>> You mean, the way you call your House of Lords the Senate? :-)
>>> Yep. And also the way we have a value-added sales tax, but don't include
>>> it in the marked price of goods.
>> Ouch. If that happened in Australia, the seller would probably be
>> prosecuted for fraudulent advertising.
>
> It's been explained many times here, but we *can't* include the sales
> tax amount in advertising. The tax amount depends on where you buy
> the product.
The Australian GST was supposed, when it was introduced, to replace
state sales taxes, which would have created national uniformity.
Theoretically the tax is collected by the federal government and
redistributed to the states. In practice, some state governments are
screaming that they're not getting the money back, so they're not
eliminating the state taxes. As a result, GST is added on top of state
taxes.
One of these days, I suppose, someone will mount a legal challenge
against taxing a tax, but so far it hasn't happened.
As far as I know, our retailers don't do national advertising. That
would create problems in several ways. For example, one state has a
deposit on soft drink bottles - you have to return the empty bottle to
get your money back - and presumably that creates a higher
over-the-counter price in that state. That example doesn't even have
anything to do with tax.
Garrett Wollman
Peter Moylan <gro.nalyomp@retep> wrote:
>As far as I know, our retailers don't do national advertising. That
>would create problems in several ways. For example, one state has a
>deposit on soft drink bottles - you have to return the empty bottle to
>get your money back - and presumably that creates a higher
>over-the-counter price in that state. That example doesn't even have
>anything to do with tax.
Happens here all the time -- they just add "plus deposit (where
applicable)" in small print where those prices are mentioned in the
ad.
(And the deposit is higher in Michigan than in the other states, and
California has something called "CRV" which works the same way but is
based on the wholesale price of scrap bottle materials or something
like that, so the amount gets adjusted from time to time.)
I believe all of the northeastern states now have a "bottle bill"
except New Hampshire. It's a source of income for the indigent,
reduces litter, and encourages recycling.
Skitt
> Peter Moylan wrote:
>> As far as I know, our retailers don't do national advertising. That
>> would create problems in several ways. For example, one state has a
>> deposit on soft drink bottles - you have to return the empty bottle to
>> get your money back - and presumably that creates a higher
>> over-the-counter price in that state. That example doesn't even have
>> anything to do with tax.
>
> Happens here all the time -- they just add "plus deposit (where
> applicable)" in small print where those prices are mentioned in the
> ad.
>
> (And the deposit is higher in Michigan than in the other states, and
> California has something called "CRV" which works the same way but is
> based on the wholesale price of scrap bottle materials or something
> like that, so the amount gets adjusted from time to time.)
The deposit in California is 5 cents for a container of a volume of less
than 24 ounces, and 10 cents for a larger one. The redemption amounts are
based on weight and vary from recycler to recycler.
The prices paid per pound for CRV containers in my area are
Aluminum: $1.570 Glass: $0.105 Plastic: $0.930
The consumer really loses money on the super-thin-walled water bottles.
--
Skitt (SF Bay Area)
http://come.to/skitt
Nick
> It's been explained many times here, but we *can't* include the sales
> tax amount in advertising. The tax amount depends on where you buy
> the product.
...
> There can be an "ouch" for foreign tourists, but all Americans know
> that sales tax will be added.
I've got no problems with it, but it makes using your last currency up
before leaving the country a PITA. Or more than one occasion I've had
enough for the advertised price of something I'd quite like to buy, but
not to cover the tax.
--
Online waterways route planner | http://canalplan.eu
Plan trips, see photos, check facilities | http://canalplan.org.uk
Stan Brown
>
> Stan Brown wrote:
> > On Fri, 28 May 2010 13:56:51 +1000, Peter Moylan wrote:
> >
> >> theocracy, plutocracy, hippocracy [*], etc.
> >>
> >> [*]My spelling checker didn't like that one, but I think Swift would
> >> have accepted it.
> >
> > For a mythical land ruled by horses?
> >
> The yahoos would no doubt have found that word easier to pronounce than
> Houyhnhnmocracy.
Yay! Someone picked up on my reference.
One of these days I must actually _read_ /Gulliver's Travels_. :-)
Uncle Ben
A 10-minute search on Google failed to find an official directive.
But there are multiple reasons to prefer first-syllable accent. Among
the accepted SI prefixes
milli
centi
kilo
mega
giga
etc.
all of them other than kilo always receive first-syllable stress, and
among quantites to be measured
volt
gram
meter
second
etc.
you never hear
kilOVolt
kilOSecond
kilOGram
It is only for (1000 in quantity) AND (length in dimension) that
anyone is tempted to stress the O in kilo.
The terms speedometer, thermometer, barometer, and photometer are all
instruments of measurement and not quantities measured.
So by proscibing kilOMeter, we eliminate an idiosyncracy in the
pronunciation in each of two classes of technical terms.
Uncle Ben
R H Draney
>
>One of these days I must actually _read_ /Gulliver's Travels_. :-)
You won't be disappointed...you'll get to visit all sorts of mythical,
non-existent countries, such as Japan....r
Mark Brader
>>> Since they vary widely (both in rate and in the types of goods and
>>> services covered), requiring the tax to be included in advertised
>>> prices would make national advertising impossible...
Mark Brader:
>> False. What it would make impossible is national advertising of the
>> same price everywhere with the seller receiving the same amount of it
>> everywhere.
Garrett Wollman:
> That's what "national advertising" means.
Most "national advertising" I see doesn't mention prices at all.
> The retailer is not going
> to change its prices on the basis of what the local sales tax happens
> to be in every market (or, worst case, every city and every county) on
> the country -- their costs and competitive position are the same
> thoughout wide swaths of territory. The notion is ridiculous.
No, but if they want to have an advertised price of $1 everywhere, it's
reasonable to expect them to actually receive 92 cents of that amount
in one jurisdiction and 95 cents in another.
>>> so it will never happen.
>>
>> So long as government accepts business's desire for misleadingly low
>> advertised prices, yes.
>
> Nothing misleading about it. Everyone knows (or is deemed to know)
> the rate of sales tax that applies in their locality...
Spoken like the person on the other side of the cash register.
--
Mark Brader "I can say nothing at this point."
Toronto "Well, you were wrong."
m...@vex.net -- Monty Python's Flying Circus
Mark Brader
> It's been explained many times here, but we *can't* include the sales
> tax amount in advertising.
Wrong.
> The tax amount depends on where you buy the product.
Right. But see my response to Garrett, just posted.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "One thing that surprises you about this business
m...@vex.net | is the surprises." -- Tim Baker
Stan Brown
>
> Stan Brown filted:
> >
> >One of these days I must actually _read_ /Gulliver's Travels_. :-)
>
> You won't be disappointed...you'll get to visit all sorts of mythical,
> non-existent countries, such as Japan....r
Reminds me of Monty Python's "all the habitable portions of the
earth, and Canada."
Mark Brader
> Reminds me of Monty Python's "all the habitable portions of the
> earth, and Canada."
Monty Python? I thought that was a lot older, like maybe Mark Twain
or Ambrose Bierce or one of the Algonquin Round Table.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto "As for Canada's lack of mystique,
m...@vex.net it is not unique." -- Mark Leeper
tony cooper
>Garrett Wollman:
>>>> Since they vary widely (both in rate and in the types of goods and
>>>> services covered), requiring the tax to be included in advertised
>>>> prices would make national advertising impossible...
>
>Mark Brader:
>>> False. What it would make impossible is national advertising of the
>>> same price everywhere with the seller receiving the same amount of it
>>> everywhere.
>
>Garrett Wollman:
>> That's what "national advertising" means.
>
>Most "national advertising" I see doesn't mention prices at all.
I disagree. Buy a US newspaper and it will be stuffed with
advertising inserts (especially on Sunday). They will often, even
usually, include price.
>> Nothing misleading about it. Everyone knows (or is deemed to know)
>> the rate of sales tax that applies in their locality...
>
>Spoken like the person on the other side of the cash register.
Or any US resident who is old enough to go shopping without an
accompanying parent.
tony cooper
>Tony Cooper:
>> It's been explained many times here, but we *can't* include the sales
>> tax amount in advertising.
>
>Wrong.
>
>> The tax amount depends on where you buy the product.
>
>Right. But see my response to Garrett, just posted.
It isn't wrong, and your response did not change that. Florida law
requires that the sales tax be added to the sales amount as a line
item. A retailer cannot legally charge a customer $1 for a product
where the $1 is inclusive of sales tax. Other states may have
different laws.
(There are exceptions. If you buy a newspaper from a vending machine
for $1, the same newspaper will be $1 plus sales tax if you purchase
it from a store.)
If you want to quibble over "can't", I'll make it "extremely
impractical to the point of impossible". Nikon, for example, is
putting inserts in newspapers all over the country for Nikon cameras.
The inserts include price. Nikon cannot require their retailers to
sell the cameras at the advertised price inclusive of sales tax.
Skitt
> (Mark Brader) wrote:
>> Tony Cooper:
>>> It's been explained many times here, but we *can't* include the sales
>>> tax amount in advertising.
>>
>> Wrong.
>>
>>> The tax amount depends on where you buy the product.
>>
>> Right. But see my response to Garrett, just posted.
>
> It isn't wrong, and your response did not change that. Florida law
> requires that the sales tax be added to the sales amount as a line
> item. A retailer cannot legally charge a customer $1 for a product
> where the $1 is inclusive of sales tax. Other states may have
> different laws.
>
> (There are exceptions. If you buy a newspaper from a vending machine
> for $1, the same newspaper will be $1 plus sales tax if you purchase
> it from a store.)
About that parenthetical paragraph, it would be unusual for a vending
machine to charge only $1 for an item that sells for that, plus tax, in a
store. I'd expect that the machine would want enough money to cover the tax
that the machine's owner has to pay. Typically, I'd expect the price of
that paper from a vending machine to be $1.25.
tony cooper
wrote:
The newspaper's price is shown on the front page ($1 weekdays). It
would be wrong, possibly illegal, and certainly upsetting, to sell the
newspaper for more than that in a vending machine, so the vending
machine price is the same price as the counter price.
A newspaper is a taxable item, so sales tax must be paid whether the
paper is sold from the machine or the counter. I don't know if the
store, the newspaper, or some distributor is responsible for paying
the tax, but most convenience stores now have the newspapers inside
and a sign on the vending machine that directs the customer inside. I
guess whoever is responsible got tired of eating the tax.
I don't really understand the system here. We have the _Orlando
Sentinel_ delivered to our home. For years we received an invoice
from some independent newspaper delivery contractor and made the check
out to that individual. Some time ago that changed and the Sentinel
now bills us directly.
Other vending machine items are not priced on the packaging as far as
I know. A Hershey bar may be $1 in a vending machine and 50 cents in
a store, but there's no designated unit price.
Mark Brader
>> Most "national advertising" I see doesn't mention prices at all.
Tony Cooper:
> I disagree. Buy a US newspaper and it will be stuffed with
> advertising inserts (especially on Sunday). They will often, even
> usually, include price.
Why do you think the advertising inserts in US newspapers (especially
on Sunday) are typical of most of the "national advertising" I see?
And if I did see them, it wouldn't occur to me that they were
identical nationally; most newspapers are not national media.
>>> Nothing misleading about it. Everyone knows (or is deemed to know)
>>> the rate of sales tax that applies in their locality...
>>
>> Spoken like the person on the other side of the cash register.
>
> Or any US resident who is old enough to go shopping without an
> accompanying parent.
Translation: "who is so used to being misled that he doesn't see
anything wrong with it any more". Perhaps if your "any US resident"
grew up in a state without sales tax they would see it differently.
I lived in Alberta for several years as a boy.
--
Mark Brader | "...one of the main causes of the fall of the Roman
Toronto | Empire was that, lacking zero, they had no way to
m...@vex.net | indicate successful termination of their C programs."
| -- Robert Firth
Mark Brader
>>> It's been explained many times here, but we *can't* include the sales
>>> tax amount in advertising.
Mark Brader:
>> Wrong.
>>> The tax amount depends on where you buy the product.
>> Right. But see my response to Garrett, just posted.
Tony Cooper:
> It isn't wrong, and your response did not change that. Florida law
> requires that the sales tax be added to the sales amount as a line
> item...
Yes, if you'd cited that then your reasoning would have been correct.
Of course, I feel such laws should be changed.
> If you want to quibble over "can't", I'll make it "extremely
> impractical to the point of impossible". Nikon, for example, is
> putting inserts in newspapers all over the country for Nikon cameras.
> The inserts include price.
But they don't have to be the same in all the newspapers.
> Nikon cannot require their retailers to
> sell the cameras at the advertised price inclusive of sales tax.
They cannot require them to sell them at *any* particular price, except
for retailers they own.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "...ordinarily, a 65-pound alligator in an apartment
m...@vex.net | would be news." --James Barron, New York Times
Mark Brader
> The newspaper's price is shown on the front page ($1 weekdays). It
> would be wrong, possibly illegal, and certainly upsetting, to sell the
> newspaper for more than that in a vending machine, so the vending
> machine price is the same price as the counter price.
By the way, I just looked at the front page of today's Toronto Star.
The price is shown as follows: "Store and Box Saturday price $2.50
including GST (higher outside the GTA)". The weekday papers use the
same wording mutatis mutandis, but the Sunday one just says "Sunday
price $1.00 (higher outside GTA)". Weird.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "To err is human, but to error requires a computer."
m...@vex.net | -- Harry Lethall
Garrett Wollman
>>>> the rate of sales tax that applies in their locality...
>>> [Mark:]
>>> Spoken like the person on the other side of the cash register.
>> [Tony Cooper:]
>> Or any US resident who is old enough to go shopping without an
>> accompanying parent.
>Translation: "who is so used to being misled that he doesn't see
>anything wrong with it any more".
That's begging the question, Mark, as you well know.
Mark Brader
>>>>> Nothing misleading about it. Everyone knows (or is deemed to know)
>>>>> the rate of sales tax that applies in their locality...
>>>> Spoken like the person on the other side of the cash register.
Tony Cooper:
>>> Or any US resident who is old enough to go shopping without an
>>> accompanying parent.
Mark Brader:
>> Translation: "who is so used to being misled that he doesn't see
>> anything wrong with it any more".
Garrett Wollman:
> That's begging the question, Mark, as you well know.
Well, perhaps my paraphrase should have been: "who is so used to
being misled that he isn't misled any more". Thus demonstrating
that if anyone is begging the question, it's Garrett.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto "Don't try this at work."
m...@vex.net -- Dennis Ritchie
Garrett Wollman
Mark Brader <m...@vex.net> wrote:
>Well, perhaps my paraphrase should have been: "who is so used to
>being misled that he isn't misled any more". Thus demonstrating
>that if anyone is begging the question, it's Garrett.
No, you are the one making circular arguments of the form "if you
don't think you're being misled it's because you're used to being
misled". You have declared, in essence, that anyone who disagrees
with you is delusional -- this isn't the first time, either -- and
I've gotten heartily sick of it. When I moved to call you on it, you
simply restated your original (circular) claim.
tony cooper
>Mark Brader:
>>> Most "national advertising" I see doesn't mention prices at all.
>
>Tony Cooper:
>> I disagree. Buy a US newspaper and it will be stuffed with
>> advertising inserts (especially on Sunday). They will often, even
>> usually, include price.
>
>Why do you think the advertising inserts in US newspapers (especially
>on Sunday) are typical of most of the "national advertising" I see?
>And if I did see them, it wouldn't occur to me that they were
>identical nationally; most newspapers are not national media.
True, I don't know what you think. However, if you do think about it,
the inserts do represent most of the national advertising in
newspapers. For products, that is, and products are what would be or
would not be priced.
The newspapers are not national media, but the inserts are. I just
spent a week of buying daily newspapers in five states. The inserts
were the mostly the same in all of them. The Best Buy, the Home
Depot, the Sears, the K-Mart, etc, inserts were in all of them. Some
were regionally targeted, but they were all basically the same. Your
local big box store - which shows prices in their ads - are not doing
the ads. The Wal-Mart ads are done by Wal-Mart's home office with
only the address copy changing by newspaper.
The non-insert ads that are for products - like a department store ad
- show prices. They are national advertising where the stores (like
Macy's) are national chains, and the ads are prepared by the store's
home office. The art and copy is sent to the local newspaper and the
local newspaper adds the local information in a space left for that.
>
>>>> Nothing misleading about it. Everyone knows (or is deemed to know)
>>>> the rate of sales tax that applies in their locality...
>>>
>>> Spoken like the person on the other side of the cash register.
>>
>> Or any US resident who is old enough to go shopping without an
>> accompanying parent.
>
>Translation: "who is so used to being misled that he doesn't see
>anything wrong with it any more". Perhaps if your "any US resident"
>grew up in a state without sales tax they would see it differently.
>I lived in Alberta for several years as a boy.
No one's being misled. Even an Alberta resident who is down here in
Florida on vacation understands the system within a day or so...if not
an hour or so if they go shopping the first day. Once the person
shops for the first time in a state with a sales tax they understand
that sales tax will be added to all taxable items in that state.
You can't be misled on Tuesday by seeing an advertisement for a
frammus for $100 if they've purchased a widget on Monday and been
charged sales tax. The only thing the person might not know is the
specific percentage of sales tax if he's in an area - as I am - where
he might shop in more than one tax district.
You imply that there's something wrong about an added sales tax. It's
a necessary evil. The state has to generate income and this is one of
the ways they do it.
tony cooper
>Tony Cooper:
>>>> It's been explained many times here, but we *can't* include the sales
>>>> tax amount in advertising.
>
>Mark Brader:
>>> Wrong.
>
>>>> The tax amount depends on where you buy the product.
>
>>> Right. But see my response to Garrett, just posted.
>
>Tony Cooper:
>> It isn't wrong, and your response did not change that. Florida law
>> requires that the sales tax be added to the sales amount as a line
>> item...
>
>Yes, if you'd cited that then your reasoning would have been correct.
I can speak from experience in Florida, but I've purchased items in
five states in the past week, and the sales tax has been a separate
line item in each case. I don't know the actual laws in those states,
but it seems to be the same.
>Of course, I feel such laws should be changed.
I don't see a need to do so.
>> If you want to quibble over "can't", I'll make it "extremely
>> impractical to the point of impossible". Nikon, for example, is
>> putting inserts in newspapers all over the country for Nikon cameras.
>> The inserts include price.
>
>But they don't have to be the same in all the newspapers.
They do for practical purposes. The insert is prepared by Nikon and
sent to the local newspaper. The newspaper over-prints the insert
with the name of the local retailer. It's a glossy, four-color,
multi-page insert and the over-print is a single color on one outside
page. To change prices would require that each newspaper print
individual inserts for that market. In my case, that would require
the Orlando Sentinel to print six separate multi-page inserts to cover
the different tax districts. There would be print runs of a few
thousand instead of a print run of hundreds of thousands. That jacks
up the price.
The same would be true for all of the inserts from all of the
different advertisers. Some of the inserts (Home Depot, Lowes, etc)
run 10 or 20 pages.
>> Nikon cannot require their retailers to
>> sell the cameras at the advertised price inclusive of sales tax.
>
>They cannot require them to sell them at *any* particular price, except
>for retailers they own.
That's another story. They may not be legally able to dictate the
retail price, but you will pay the same price for a Nikon or a Canon
or any other major camera brand in any store in the US. You may get a
special package deal where the retailer adds a camera bag or a tripod
or a SD card, but the basic body and lens system will be the same
everywhere in the US through an authorized dealer. You will small
price differences, but there will be a different lens or some other
difference. Some retailers discount discontinued models, but that
model has to be out of production.
The internet ads you see for lower prices are for "gray market"
cameras or from unscrupulous retailers who "lose" your order if you
don't add over-priced accessories. You can, though, avoid paying
sales tax by buying over the internet. Some internet sources charge
shipping and some don't.
I follow three photography newsgroups and three photography forums and
belong to a large photography club. I keep up in this area.
Stan Brown
>
> Stan Brown:
> > Reminds me of Monty Python's "all the habitable portions of the
> > earth, and Canada."
>
> Monty Python? I thought that was a lot older, like maybe Mark Twain
> or Ambrose Bierce or one of the Algonquin Round Table.
It could be, but I recall it only from Monty Python. I've read most
of what Mark Twain wrote, at one time or another in my life, but it's
possible that he wrote it and I missed it or forgot it.
Surprisingly, Google has *zero* hits for
"all the habitable portions of the earth and Canada"
as well as
"all the inhabitable portions of the earth and Canada".
But you're right about Ambrose Bierce. A little further googling
found:
"Man, n.: An animal so lost in rapturous contemplation of what he
thinks he is as to overlook what he indubitably ought to be. His
chief occupation is extermination of other animals and his own
species, which, however, multiplies with such insistent rapidity as
to infest the whole habitable earth and Canada. -
Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary"
Thats perhaps where Monty Python got it.
Stan Brown
> On Sat, 29 May 2010 15:00:25 -0500, m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) wrote:
> >Most "national advertising" I see doesn't mention prices at all.
>
> I disagree. Buy a US newspaper and it will be stuffed with
> advertising inserts (especially on Sunday). They will often, even
> usually, include price.
And if you look carefully you'll see that they are *local* ads, even
for the big chains like Best Buy. there's almost always a list of
stores at which the prices apply.
Sometimes it's regional, sometimes it's extremely localized. For
example, Wegmans at Ithaca doesn't have the same ad as the Syracuse
Wegmans, even though they're only about an hour's drive apart.
Stan Brown
> It isn't wrong, and your response did not change that. Florida law
> requires that the sales tax be added to the sales amount as a line
> item. A retailer cannot legally charge a customer $1 for a product
> where the $1 is inclusive of sales tax.
What a silly law! But your report is accurate, according to
"Collecting Tax" on page 13 of the Business Owner's Guide at
http://dor.myflorida.com/dor/forms/2010/gt300015.pdf
(I note in passing that Florida's official government site seems to
have a .com suffix:
http://www.myflorida.com/myflorida/copyright.html
I refrain from the obvious joke.)
> Other states may have different laws.
Other states *do*. I have a vendor's license in New York, and used
to have one in Ohio. In both states it is/was perfectly legal for
posted prices to be inclusive of sales tax. I believe New York
requires a sign to say so if they are inclusive, but I'm not certain
about that since my prices aren't.
Stan Brown
>
> "tony cooper" wrote:
> > (There are exceptions. If you buy a newspaper from a vending machine
> > for $1, the same newspaper will be $1 plus sales tax if you purchase
> > it from a store.)
>
> About that parenthetical paragraph, it would be unusual for a vending
> machine to charge only $1 for an item that sells for that, plus tax, in a
> store. I'd expect that the machine would want enough money to cover the tax
> that the machine's owner has to pay. Typically, I'd expect the price of
> that paper from a vending machine to be $1.25.
I would not. Newspapers aren't taxable where I live, nor were they
in Ohio when I lived there nor in Maryland when I visited. I suspect
it's a First Amendment thing.
Stan Brown
> To change prices would require that each newspaper print
> individual inserts for that market.
Don't they? I was under the impression that newspapers do in fact
print the ad inserts from camera-ready images supplied by the
advertisers. It seems incredibly wasteful to truck a few thousand
inserts to each local newspaper.
tony cooper
<the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>On Sat, 29 May 2010 15:33:50 -0700, Skitt wrote:
>>
>> "tony cooper" wrote:
>> > (There are exceptions. If you buy a newspaper from a vending machine
>> > for $1, the same newspaper will be $1 plus sales tax if you purchase
>> > it from a store.)
>>
>> About that parenthetical paragraph, it would be unusual for a vending
>> machine to charge only $1 for an item that sells for that, plus tax, in a
>> store. I'd expect that the machine would want enough money to cover the tax
>> that the machine's owner has to pay. Typically, I'd expect the price of
>> that paper from a vending machine to be $1.25.
>
>I would not. Newspapers aren't taxable where I live, nor were they
>in Ohio when I lived there nor in Maryland when I visited. I suspect
>it's a First Amendment thing.
They are taxable in Florida. We purchased newspapers in Georgia,
Kentucky, Tennessee, and Indiana last week. I don't recall each
purchase, but I do know that some were taxed. I remember digging for
pennies.
To the best of my knowledge, the First Amendment applies to Florida
and to those other states.
What I'm curious about is the tax situation with _USA Today_. All the
motels had them available free at the desk. (I prefer to read local
papers when I travel)
In Florida, when a company gives something away, the company must
remit the taxes that *would* have been charged if the item was sold.
If the cover price of _USA Today_ is $1.00 (I don't know what it is),
then someone in Florida must remit 6 to 7 cents to the Department of
Revenue for each copy given away. The motel, maybe, or some company
that supplies the issues to the motel.
I got nailed on this when my business was audited by the Florida
Department of Revenue. My company provided samples of certain
disposable items to hospitals. I took them out of inventory and
charged them to a "sample account". The DoR's position was that I was
depriving the state of income by giving away the product. I paid back
taxes and a penalty. I was even charged taxes for instruments used
for demonstration purposes and not sold but journaled over to
salesmen's accounts.
I changed the system after that and negotiated with the suppliers to
provide me with free goods for sampling purposes and accounted for
them separately. If the supplier's state didn't have the same policy
as the Florida DoR, then no taxes were paid. I really didn't save
much money because there was an increase in paperwork and handling,
but I was mad.