what's the word "proctive" mean?
digit...@hotmail.com
Robert Lieblich
>
> It's difficult to specify...
Perhaps because there's no such word as "proctive." There, is,
however, a word "proactive," and we are fortunate to have books called
"dictionaries" that help with such things:
http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/proactive?view=uk
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=proactive
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=63037&dict=CALD
http://www.bartleby.com/61/28/P0572800.html
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861736812
All of these were found through OneLook: <http://www.onelook.com/>.
If you're still confused after reading these, tell us why and we'll
try to help.
--
Bob Lieblich
Verbophile
Jim Lawton
<robert....@verizon.net> wrote:
>digit...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>> It's difficult to specify...
>
>Perhaps because there's no such word as "proctive."
Not so fast! Googling suggests some relationship with "protective" - I find
"skin proctive (barrier) creams"
" She is once again proctive of her cage" - of a territorial parrot
"NonSlip Polyurethane Proctive Coating For Floors"
among some 40 hits in "groups" and 700 on the web ...
--
Jim
the polymoth
Robert Lieblich
Confirming once again the wisdom of the FAQ: Never say never (or
however Mark Israel wrote it).
At least -- and thank goodness -- Google has no listing for
"proctivologist."
--
Bob Lieblich
Who certainly wouldn't want to have to see one
Ted Schuerzinger
wrote in news:4364CAA8...@verizon.net:
> Perhaps because there's no such word as "proctive." There, is,
> however, a word "proactive," and we are fortunate to have books called
> "dictionaries" that help with such things:
"Proactive" is, of course, the opposite of "propassive".
--
Ted <fedya at bestweb dot net>
Oh Marge, anyone can miss Canada, all tucked away down there....
--Homer Simpson
Pat Durkin
"Robert Lieblich" <robert....@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:4364E4CA...@verizon.net...
I did consider "proactive", but decided the user was probably searching
for a short form for "proctological (proctologic)".
I am in favor. Maybe the exams would be shorter, as well, if that term
were adopted.
Bill Bonde ('by a commodius vicus of recirculation')
Robert Lieblich wrote:
>
> digit...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
> > It's difficult to specify...
>
> Perhaps because there's no such word as "proctive."
>
Maybe it's an erroneously done up "precative".
--
Had Tolstoy confined himself to war or peace, he could have been
finished in seven hundred and fifty pages.
Steve Hayes
>It's difficult to specify...
It means you like Clive and are not anticlive.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
R H Draney
>
>I did consider "proactive", but decided the user was probably searching
>for a short form for "proctological (proctologic)".
>I am in favor. Maybe the exams would be shorter, as well, if that term
>were adopted.
Take all the time you like to warm those hands up first....r
Bob Cunningham
<dur...@sbcglobal.com> said:
>
> "Robert Lieblich" <robert....@verizon.net> wrote in message
[...]
> > At least -- and thank goodness -- Google has no listing for
> > "proctivologist."
> I did consider "proactive", but decided the user was probably searching
> for a short form for "proctological (proctologic)".
> I am in favor. Maybe the exams would be shorter, as well, if that term
> were adopted.
I recently saw a reference to "digital proctological
examination". Are the exams speedier when they do them
digitally rather than the old-fashioned way?
(GEBYY)
--
Bob Cunningham, Southern California, USofA
'Analog circuitry can only approximate the real digital world.'
-- Author unknown
Bill Bonde ('by a commodius vicus of recirculation')
Bob Cunningham wrote:
>
> On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 16:09:45 GMT, "Pat Durkin"
> <dur...@sbcglobal.com> said:
>
> >
> > "Robert Lieblich" <robert....@verizon.net> wrote in message
>
> [...]
>
> > > At least -- and thank goodness -- Google has no listing for
> > > "proctivologist."
>
> > I did consider "proactive", but decided the user was probably searching
> > for a short form for "proctological (proctologic)".
> > I am in favor. Maybe the exams would be shorter, as well, if that term
> > were adopted.
>
> I recently saw a reference to "digital proctological
> examination". Are the exams speedier when they do them
> digitally rather than the old-fashioned way?
>
At least they are more discrete/discreet.
Charles Riggs
<robert....@verizon.net> wrote:
>digit...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>> It's difficult to specify...
>
>Perhaps because there's no such word as "proctive."
I'm procivley positive there is such a word. In fact, the English
language would be non-proctive-ive if there weren't.
--
Charles Riggs
Scotius
>It's difficult to specify...
I've never heard the word before. Are you sure you aren't
mistaking it for "proactive"?
Robert Bannister
> Somebody claiming to be Robert Lieblich <robert....@verizon.net>
> wrote in news:4364CAA8...@verizon.net:
>
>
>>Perhaps because there's no such word as "proctive." There, is,
>>however, a word "proactive," and we are fortunate to have books called
>>"dictionaries" that help with such things:
>
>
> "Proactive" is, of course, the opposite of "propassive".
>
I'm glad I'm not alone in thinking that proactive is a silly
sociologists' word that we don't need.
--
Rob Bannister
Tony Cooper
More people should be proactive in regard to this issue and speak up.
--
Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL
Charles Riggs
<rob...@it.net.au> wrote:
Yes, it is one of the silliest words in the English language. Ungood
people, only, use it. We don't need it, and I'm not so sure we need
sociologists either.
I could also do without estate agents, life insurance salesmen, used
car salesmen, American Republicans, hunters and gun owners,
Midwesterners, loud people, women who giggle, people who jog, men who
wear white socks, people who don't tip, door to door salesmen, fat
people without a medical excuse, and Belgians.
--
Charles Riggs
Weatherlawyer
Jim Lawton wrote:
>
> Not so fast! Googling suggests some relationship with "protective" - I find
> "skin proctive (barrier) creams"
>
spelling of a word. Why a denizen of this newsgroup should appeal to
Google for verification is beyond me.
But why should the pathetic be missing from here? They are as common as
the spelling erur onthi see shure in just about every usenet group I
suppose. Mujas saddoes.
Jim Lawton
wrote:
>
>Jim Lawton wrote:
>>
>> Not so fast! Googling suggests some relationship with "protective" - I find
>> "skin proctive (barrier) creams"
>>
>Google search engines are not required to accept only the correct
>spelling of a word. Why a denizen of this newsgroup should appeal to
>Google for verification is beyond me.
>
I didn't go to Google to check the spelling, I went to see if the word was used
in a way which _didn't_ suggest a misspelling. Sure enough it does. It is used
consistently to mean "protective" - in both general use, and as the name of
various products.
Now Bob Lieblich, to whom I was replying, accepted that, and his post is there
for you to see, so I don't see why you didn't understand.
Your general question "why go to Google" is answered by the name of this group -
Google is a place where the generality of humanity is using English, and most of
us go there for all sorts of reasons.
>But why should the pathetic be missing from here? They are as common as
>the spelling erur onthi see shure in just about every usenet group I
>suppose. Mujas saddoes.
Don't drool, there's a good lad.
--
Jim
the polymoth
Richard R. Hershberger
Sociologists' word? The usual complaint I see is that it is
business-speak. What is the evidence that the word has some particular
connection with sociologists?
Richard R. Hershberger
Adrian Bailey
news:28kcm1p2mq08bjou5...@4ax.com...
> On 31 Oct 2005 07:43:22 -0800, "Weatherlawyer" <Weathe...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Jim Lawton wrote:
> >>
> >> Not so fast! Googling suggests some relationship with "protective" - I
find
> >> "skin proctive (barrier) creams"
> >>
> >Google search engines are not required to accept only the correct
> >spelling of a word. Why a denizen of this newsgroup should appeal to
> >Google for verification is beyond me.
> >
> I didn't go to Google to check the spelling, I went to see if the word was
used
> in a way which _didn't_ suggest a misspelling. Sure enough it does.
No, it doesn't.
> It is used
> consistently
No.
> to mean "protective" - in both general use,
That's a misspelling.
> and as the name of
> various products.
That's sometimes a misspelling also.
Adrian
William
> I could also do without estate agents, life insurance salesmen, used
> car salesmen, American Republicans, hunters and gun owners,
> Midwesterners, loud people, women who giggle, people who jog, men who
> wear white socks, people who don't tip, door to door salesmen, fat
> people without a medical excuse, and Belgians.
I'm sort of with you on the rest of that list, but the Belgians!
Please. Surely you've tasted their chocolates?
--
WH
Ted Schuerzinger
in news:1130785800....@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>> I'm glad I'm not alone in thinking that proactive is a silly
>> sociologists' word that we don't need.
>
> Sociologists' word? The usual complaint I see is that it is
> business-speak.
I agree with you that it's business-speak. I guess this means we have a
synergy. Perhaps we can leverage it proactively. <barf>
John Holmes
>
> At least -- and thank goodness -- Google has no listing for
> "proctivologist."
Well, now it gets 4 (soon to be 5) hits in Google groups, followed by:
New! Get the latest messages on proctivologist emailed to you with
Google Alerts.
It must be a manifestation of that principle that you can't observe a
system without causing perturbations in that system.
--
Regards
John
for mail: my initials plus a u e
at tpg dot com dot au
Jim Lawton
>"Jim Lawton" <use...@jimlawton.TAKEOUTinfo> wrote in message
>news:28kcm1p2mq08bjou5...@4ax.com...
>> On 31 Oct 2005 07:43:22 -0800, "Weatherlawyer" <Weathe...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Jim Lawton wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Not so fast! Googling suggests some relationship with "protective" - I
>find
>> >> "skin proctive (barrier) creams"
>> >>
>> >Google search engines are not required to accept only the correct
>> >spelling of a word. Why a denizen of this newsgroup should appeal to
>> >Google for verification is beyond me.
>> >
>> I didn't go to Google to check the spelling, I went to see if the word was
>used
>> in a way which _didn't_ suggest a misspelling. Sure enough it does.
>
>No, it doesn't.
I'm sorry, you are extremeley positive. I said " in a way which _didn't_ suggest
a misspelling"
>
>> It is used
>> consistently
>
This is a consistent use,
Extention table, also adjustable height. Solid beech wood frame and legs. Wood
veneered tops. Finished with transparent proctive varnish OR stained cherry with
transparent proctive varnish OR stained wenge transparent proctive varnish.
>
>> to mean "protective" - in both general use,
>
>That's a misspelling.
Possibly
>> and as the name of
>> various products.
>
>That's sometimes a misspelling also.
Sometimes?
The question one has to ask is, "Is this a misspelling, or the birth of a new
word?".
--
Jim
the polymoth
R H Draney
I've never understood this attitude toward Belgians...how can any nationality
that produces Rene Magritte be all bad?...r
The Other Fran
Bob Cunningham wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 16:09:45 GMT, "Pat Durkin"
> <dur...@sbcglobal.com> said:
>
> >
> > "Robert Lieblich" <robert....@verizon.net> wrote in message
>
> [...]
>
> > > At least -- and thank goodness -- Google has no listing for
> > > "proctivologist."
>
> > I did consider "proactive", but decided the user was probably searching
> > for a short form for "proctological (proctologic)".
> > I am in favor. Maybe the exams would be shorter, as well, if that term
> > were adopted.
>
> I recently saw a reference to "digital proctological
> examination". Are the exams speedier when they do them
> digitally rather than the old-fashioned way?
Probably, but nobody can put their finger on why that is.
TOF
Charles Riggs
<rrh...@acme.com> wrote:
It is a word popular with psychologists, and most everyone knows their
general level of intelligence. Faux doctors, for the ones who have
that degree.
--
Charles Riggs
Charles Riggs
wrote:
Yes, and I drank Russian vodka when the communists were in charge.
Your point?
I'm happy to hear you go along with the rest of my little list,
printed here only in part, even if only sort of.
--
Charles Riggs
Charles Riggs
What can I say, Ron? Women who giggle aren't all bad either. No-one is
*all* bad; Stalin, it is said, was great with children, for example.
--
Charles Riggs
Charles Riggs
<exw...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 16:09:45 GMT, "Pat Durkin"
><dur...@sbcglobal.com> said:
>
>>
>> "Robert Lieblich" <robert....@verizon.net> wrote in message
>
>[...]
>
>> > At least -- and thank goodness -- Google has no listing for
>> > "proctivologist."
>
>> I did consider "proactive", but decided the user was probably searching
>> for a short form for "proctological (proctologic)".
>> I am in favor. Maybe the exams would be shorter, as well, if that term
>> were adopted.
>
>I recently saw a reference to "digital proctological
>examination". Are the exams speedier when they do them
>digitally rather than the old-fashioned way?
I won't ask what that old-fashioned way is.
--
Charles Riggs
Nate Branscom
R H Draney wrote:
>
> I've never understood this attitude toward Belgians...how can any nationality
> that produces Rene Magritte be all bad?...r
Re: Proctive
Ceci n'est pas un mot.
--Nate (one who makes jokes that nobody laughs at)
Jim Lawton
>On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 16:09:45 GMT, "Pat Durkin"
><dur...@sbcglobal.com> said:
>
>>
>> "Robert Lieblich" <robert....@verizon.net> wrote in message
>
>[...]
>
>> > At least -- and thank goodness -- Google has no listing for
>> > "proctivologist."
>
>> I did consider "proactive", but decided the user was probably searching
>> for a short form for "proctological (proctologic)".
>> I am in favor. Maybe the exams would be shorter, as well, if that term
>> were adopted.
>
>I recently saw a reference to "digital proctological
>examination". Are the exams speedier when they do them
>digitally rather than the old-fashioned way?
>
On the hole, yes.
--
Jim
the polymoth
Ted Schuerzinger
wrote in news:4e6em157s6vm8mbn0...@4ax.com:
> I'm sorry, you are extremeley positive. I said " in a way which
> _didn't_ suggest a misspelling"
>
>>
>>> It is used
>>> consistently
>>
>
> This is a consistent use,
>
> Extention table, also adjustable height. Solid beech wood frame and
> legs. Wood veneered tops. Finished with transparent proctive varnish
> OR stained cherry with transparent proctive varnish OR stained wenge
> transparent proctive varnish.
Considering that this quote also has the misspelling "extention", I'd say
it's a distinct possibility that "proctive" is a misspelling as well.
Jim Lawton
>Somebody claiming to be Jim Lawton <use...@jimlawton.TAKEOUTinfo>
>wrote in news:4e6em157s6vm8mbn0...@4ax.com:
>
>> I'm sorry, you are extremeley positive. I said " in a way which
>> _didn't_ suggest a misspelling"
>>
>>>
>>>> It is used
>>>> consistently
>>>
>>
>> This is a consistent use,
>>
>> Extention table, also adjustable height. Solid beech wood frame and
>> legs. Wood veneered tops. Finished with transparent proctive varnish
>> OR stained cherry with transparent proctive varnish OR stained wenge
>> transparent proctive varnish.
>
>Considering that this quote also has the misspelling "extention", I'd say
>it's a distinct possibility that "proctive" is a misspelling as well.
Yes, I noticed that - can't win them all, ha ha.
--
Jim
the polymoth
Richard Bollard
<rob...@it.net.au> wrote:
I saw it defined once as "prememptively reactive".
--
Richard Bollard
Canberra Australia
To email, I'm at AMT not spAMT.
Richard Bollard
wrote:
But better with a really good olive oil.
Robert Lieblich
>
> Robert Lieblich wrote:
> >
> > At least -- and thank goodness -- Google has no listing for
> > "proctivologist."
>
> Well, now it gets 4 (soon to be 5) hits in Google groups, followed by:
>
> New! Get the latest messages on proctivologist emailed to you with
> Google Alerts.
>
> It must be a manifestation of that principle that you can't observe a
> system without causing perturbations in that system.
I think Heisenberg said that, but I'm not sure.
--
Bob Lieblich
I bet Peter Olcott is sure