Nouns and adjectives in chess
tjb
mentions "the white bishop" and "the black queen". It seems that the author
feels that the nouns should be capitalised while the adjectives shouldn't.
Is this logical?
Also, how about the word "Grandmaster"? I guess that should be capitalised
(e.g., "The Grandmaster dazzled the crowd.") as a noun, but would it be
capitalised as an adjective (e.g., "Guess the grandmaster move.")?
Jerry Friedman
+aue200...@nospam.firedrake.org> wrote:
> tjb wrote:
> >A chess book I own refers to the two sides as "White" and "Black", but
> >mentions "the white bishop" and "the black queen". It seems that the author
> >feels that the nouns should be capitalised while the adjectives shouldn't.
> >Is this logical?
>
> no real name available.
And sometimes when there is, by convention.
> As a proper noun, it is capitalised.
And "white" is a description of those pieces, so it's not capitalized.
I'd capitalize "grandmaster" only as a title. "The strongest player
present was Grandmaster Lputian." (Although "GM Lputian" is more
likely, I think.) When it's a noun but not a title, I wouldn't
capitalize it. "Eight grandmasters will participate in the
tournament."
--
Jerry Friedman
Roland Hutchinson
> On Nov 3, 12:24 pm, Roger Burton West <roger
> +aue200...@nospam.firedrake.org> wrote:
>> tjb wrote:
>> >A chess book I own refers to the two sides as "White" and "Black", but
>> >mentions "the white bishop" and "the black queen". It seems that the
>> >author feels that the nouns should be capitalised while the adjectives
>> >shouldn't. Is this logical?
>>
>> White is the name given to the player of the white pieces when there is
>> no real name available.
>
> And sometimes when there is, by convention.
>
>> As a proper noun, it is capitalised.
I believe White and Black have some bridge-playing friends named (BrE:
called) North, South, East, and West. If I am not very much mistaken,
they were all at school with Stephen Leacock's A, B, and C.
--
Roland Hutchinson
He calls himself "the Garden State's leading violist da gamba,"
... comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy.
--Newark (NJ) Star Ledger ( http://tinyurl.com/RolandIsNJ )
Mark Brader
> I believe White and Black have some bridge-playing friends named (BrE:
> called) North, South, East, and West. If I am not very much mistaken,
> they were all at school with Stephen Leacock's A, B, and C.
In fact, it's possible that some of them were the same individuals,
who changed their names at some point. In Edmond Hoyle's original
Short Treatise on Whist, the players were called A, B, C, and D --
with A and B (sitting opposite each other) as partners. At least as
late as the 1920s, some writers on forms of bridge referred to the
four positions as A, B, Y, and Z (again with A and B as partners).
Based on slight evidence, it seems possible to me that the compass-point
notation was first used in duplicate whist and duplicate bridge, where it
was important to name the players' positions in an easily remembered way.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto, m...@vex.net | "Well, *somebody* had to say it."
My text in this article is in the public domain.
tjb
> And "white" is a description of those pieces, so it's not capitalized.
Ah, good point!
Leslie Danks
> On Nov 3, 12:24�pm, Roger Burton West <roger
> +aue200...@nospam.firedrake.org> wrote:
>> tjb �wrote:
>> >A chess book I own refers to the two sides as "White" and "Black", but
>> >mentions "the white bishop" and "the black queen". It seems that the
>> >author feels that the nouns should be capitalised while the adjectives
>> >shouldn't. Is this logical?
>>
>> White is the name given to the player of the white pieces when there is
>> no real name available.
>
> And sometimes when there is, by convention.
>
>> As a proper noun, it is capitalised.
>
> And "white" is a description of those pieces, so it's not capitalized.
Not always literally: I have a chess set made from light and dark maple of
which White's pieces are cream-coloured and Black's pieces are dark
brown. Since "the white bishop" means the bishop belonging to White, I
think "White" (and "Black") should indeed be capitalised. Analogously,
one refers to the "Arsenal striker" and not to the "arsenal striker".
Moreover, the few chess books I have just glanced at capitalise the names
of the pieces as well, though this may reflect the age of the books...
If we consider bishops, we can complicate the issue further. Since bishops
can move only diagonally, each player has one bishop confined to
the "white" squares on the board and one bishop confined to the "black"
squares. Thus at the start of the game, the following bishops are part of
the line-up:
White's white Bishop (which is coloured "white")
White's black Bishop (which is coloured "white")
Black's white Bishop (which is coloured "black")
Black's black Bishop (which is coloured "black")
Despite the fact that chess boards are available in different colour
combinations (mine is inlaid with light and dark maple to match the
pieces) one still refers to white squares and black squares, in this case
non-capitalised.
> I'd capitalize "grandmaster" only as a title. "The strongest player
> present was Grandmaster Lputian." (Although "GM Lputian" is more
> likely, I think.) When it's a noun but not a title, I wouldn't
> capitalize it. "Eight grandmasters will participate in the
> tournament."
I agree.
--
Les (BrE)
Andrew B.
> Jerry Friedman wrote:
>
> If we consider bishops, we can complicate the issue further. Since bishops
> can move only diagonally, each player has one bishop confined to
> the "white" squares on the board and one bishop confined to the "black"
> squares. Thus at the start of the game, the following bishops are part of
> the line-up:
>
> White's white Bishop (which is coloured "white")
> White's black Bishop (which is coloured "white")
> Black's white Bishop (which is coloured "black")
> Black's black Bishop (which is coloured "black")
More usual (in my experience) is to refer to "light/dark bishops". Or
you could just use "king's/queen's bishop".
> Despite the fact that chess boards are available in different colour
> combinations (mine is inlaid with light and dark maple to match the
> pieces) one still refers to white squares and black squares, in this case
> non-capitalised.
Or, again, light squares and dark squares.
> > I'd capitalize "grandmaster" only as a title. "The strongest player
> > present was Grandmaster Lputian." (Although "GM Lputian" is more
> > likely, I think.)
Certainly gets a lot more google hits. "IGM Lputian" (for
"international grandmaster) gets none at all - the term and
abbreviation are possibly dying out.
Jerry Friedman
> >> As a proper noun, it is capitalised.
>
> > And "white" is a description of those pieces, so it's not capitalized.
>
> Not always literally: I have a chess set made from light and dark maple of
> which White's pieces are cream-coloured and Black's pieces are dark
> brown. Since "the white bishop" means the bishop belonging to White, I
> think "White" (and "Black") should indeed be capitalised. Analogously,
> one refers to the "Arsenal striker" and not to the "arsenal striker".
> Moreover, the few chess books I have just glanced at capitalise the names
> of the pieces as well, though this may reflect the age of the books...
>
> If we consider bishops, we can complicate the issue further. Since bishops
> can move only diagonally, each player has one bishop confined to
> the "white" squares on the board and one bishop confined to the "black"
> squares. Thus at the start of the game, the following bishops are part of
> the line-up:
>
> White's white Bishop (which is coloured "white")
> White's black Bishop (which is coloured "white")
> Black's white Bishop (which is coloured "black")
> Black's black Bishop (which is coloured "black")
As Andrew B. says, "light bishop" is more common. I also see "light-
square bishop" and "dark-square bishop". Modern players have not
overlooked the opportunity for TLAs. In the KID, black fianchettoes
his DSB.
> Despite the fact that chess boards are available in different colour
> combinations (mine is inlaid with light and dark maple to match the
> pieces) one still refers to white squares and black squares, in this case
> non-capitalised.
I think this convention applies more strongly to the pieces. Whatever
color they really are, they're still white and black. A quick look at
GB finds "black queen", "black Queen", and "Black Queen" on the first
page, but no "Black queen".
[snip what we agree on]
--
Jerry Friedman
Leslie Danks
> On Nov 5, 12:04�pm, Leslie Danks <leslie.da...@aon.at> wrote:
[...]
>> White's white Bishop (which is coloured "white")
>> White's black Bishop (which is coloured "white")
>> Black's white Bishop (which is coloured "black")
>> Black's black Bishop (which is coloured "black")
>
> As Andrew B. says, "light bishop" is more common. I also see "light-
> square bishop" and "dark-square bishop". Modern players have not
> overlooked the opportunity for TLAs. In the KID, black fianchettoes
> his DSB.
I must confess that the use of "light" and "dark" in this context is new
to me -- probably because it is many decades since I was on the hoof
chesswise. As an aside, the "dark bishop" and similar ought to be
characters in the next Dan Brown comic book.
>> Despite the fact that chess boards are available in different colour
>> combinations (mine is inlaid with light and dark maple to match the
>> pieces) one still refers to white squares and black squares, in this
>> case non-capitalised.
>
> I think this convention applies more strongly to the pieces. Whatever
> color they really are, they're still white and black. A quick look at
> GB finds "black queen", "black Queen", and "Black Queen" on the first
> page, but no "Black queen".
>
> [snip what we agree on]
>
> --
> Jerry Friedman
--
Les (BrE)
J. J. Lodder
Stan Brown
<leslie...@aon.at>:
> I have a chess set made from light and dark maple of
> which White's pieces are cream-coloured and Black's pieces are dark
> brown. Since "the white bishop" means the bishop belonging to White, I
> think "White" (and "Black") should indeed be capitalised.
My own point of view is that in chess "white" and "black" are terms
of art meaning "the lighter of the two colors" and "the darker of the
two colors".
"What color are the black pieces?" "They are dark brown."
That seems perfectly reasonable to me.
--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Shikata ga nai...
Stan Brown
> combinations (mine is inlaid with light and dark maple to match the
> pieces) one still refers to white squares and black squares, in this case
> non-capitalised.
I agree. But if you accept this or the squares, why not accept it
for the pieces?
Leslie Danks
> Thu, 05 Nov 2009 19:04:47 +0100 from Leslie Danks
> <leslie...@aon.at>:
>> Despite the fact that chess boards are available in different colour
>> combinations (mine is inlaid with light and dark maple to match the
>> pieces) one still refers to white squares and black squares, in this
>> case non-capitalised.
>
> I agree. But if you accept this or the squares, why not accept it
> for the pieces?
My attitude is descriptive rather than prescriptive. If the majority of
chess players and chess commentators chose not to capitalise
the "colours" of the pieces, it wouldn't bother me at all. But my
impression (unsubstantiated by hard statistics) is that most do
capitalise them.
--
Les (BrE)
tony cooper
<the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 19:04:47 +0100 from Leslie Danks
><leslie...@aon.at>:
>> I have a chess set made from light and dark maple of
>> which White's pieces are cream-coloured and Black's pieces are dark
>> brown. Since "the white bishop" means the bishop belonging to White, I
>> think "White" (and "Black") should indeed be capitalised.
>
>My own point of view is that in chess "white" and "black" are terms
>of art meaning "the lighter of the two colors" and "the darker of the
>two colors".
>
>"What color are the black pieces?" "They are dark brown."
>
>That seems perfectly reasonable to me.
Perfectly reasonable to me, too. I have noticed a wide range of color
amongst black Americans. Unlike chessmen, though, I've never seen a
truly black one.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Chuck Riggs
We see Africans here in Ireland who, if not on the money, come very
close.
--
Regards,
Chuck Riggs,
An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE
Steve Hayes
wrote:
>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 19:04:47 +0100 from Leslie Danks
><leslie...@aon.at>:
>> I have a chess set made from light and dark maple of
>> which White's pieces are cream-coloured and Black's pieces are dark
>> brown. Since "the white bishop" means the bishop belonging to White, I
>> think "White" (and "Black") should indeed be capitalised.
>
>My own point of view is that in chess "white" and "black" are terms
>of art meaning "the lighter of the two colors" and "the darker of the
>two colors".
>
>"What color are the black pieces?" "They are dark brown."
>
>That seems perfectly reasonable to me.
And what about the Red Queen, in "Through the looking-glass"?
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
R H Draney
>
>On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 06:35:47 -0500, Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm>
>wrote:
>
>>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 19:04:47 +0100 from Leslie Danks
>><leslie...@aon.at>:
>>> I have a chess set made from light and dark maple of
>>> which White's pieces are cream-coloured and Black's pieces are dark
>>> brown. Since "the white bishop" means the bishop belonging to White, I
>>> think "White" (and "Black") should indeed be capitalised.
>>
>>My own point of view is that in chess "white" and "black" are terms
>>of art meaning "the lighter of the two colors" and "the darker of the
>>two colors".
>>
>>"What color are the black pieces?" "They are dark brown."
>>
>>That seems perfectly reasonable to me.
>
>And what about the Red Queen, in "Through the looking-glass"?
Clearly a communist....
Did everyone else learn the same rule I did for remember whether red or black
(or red or white) moves first when you don't have actual black and white
pieces?..."fire before smoke", they'd say, and since smoke can be either black
or white (cf. the College of Cardinals choosing a new Pope), that meant red
always moves first if it's present....r
--
A pessimist sees the glass as half empty.
An optometrist asks whether you see the glass
more full like this?...or like this?
Mark Brader
> Did everyone else learn the same rule I did for remember whether
> red or black (or red or white) moves first when you don't have
> actual black and white pieces?..."fire before smoke", they'd say,
> and since smoke can be either black or white (cf. the College of
> Cardinals choosing a new Pope), that meant red always moves first
> if it's present.
I hope nobody else learned that! It's the pieces now called black that
could be red, and White always moves first.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto "He seems unable to win without the added
m...@vex.net thrill of changing sides." -- Chess
John Varela
> R.H. Draney:
> > Did everyone else learn the same rule I did for remember whether
> > red or black (or red or white) moves first when you don't have
> > actual black and white pieces?..."fire before smoke", they'd say,
> > and since smoke can be either black or white (cf. the College of
> > Cardinals choosing a new Pope), that meant red always moves first
> > if it's present.
>
> I hope nobody else learned that! It's the pieces now called black that
> could be red, and White always moves first.
I have an antique ivory chess set, originally the property of a
great-grandfather, with red and white pieces.
--
John Varela
Trade NEWlamps for OLDlamps for email
Steve Hayes
>R.H. Draney:
>> Did everyone else learn the same rule I did for remember whether
>> red or black (or red or white) moves first when you don't have
>> actual black and white pieces?..."fire before smoke", they'd say,
>> and since smoke can be either black or white (cf. the College of
>> Cardinals choosing a new Pope), that meant red always moves first
>> if it's present.
>
>I hope nobody else learned that! It's the pieces now called black that
>could be red, and White always moves first.
And the arrangement of the pieces on the board is asymmetrical, so White and
Black/Red play different games.
the Omrud
It's a pity those scarlet-tusked elephants died out.
--
David
R H Draney
>
>John Varela wrote:
>>
>> I have an antique ivory chess set, originally the property of a
>> great-grandfather, with red and white pieces.
>
>It's a pity those scarlet-tusked elephants died out.
Perhaps it was due to the disappearance of vermilion pistachios....r
Roland Hutchinson
Ironically, in view of their position in the game, they were largely done
in by the great White hunters.
John Varela
Red in tooth and claw, innit?
Nick
> R.H. Draney:
>> Did everyone else learn the same rule I did for remember whether
>> red or black (or red or white) moves first when you don't have
>> actual black and white pieces?..."fire before smoke", they'd say,
>> and since smoke can be either black or white (cf. the College of
>> Cardinals choosing a new Pope), that meant red always moves first
>> if it's present.
>
> I hope nobody else learned that! It's the pieces now called black that
> could be red, and White always moves first.
We watched "Toy Story" last night. There is a very quick view of a
draughts ("chequers") board that I'm pretty convinced had black and red
pieces on it (my family tolerate me spending hours here, but I think
winding the tape backwards to check would be going too far).
--
Online waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk
development version: http://canalplan.eu
Jerry Friedman
> m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) writes:
> > R.H. Draney:
> >> Did everyone else learn the same rule I did for remember whether
> >> red or black (or red or white) moves first when you don't have
> >> actual black and white pieces?..."fire before smoke", they'd say,
> >> and since smoke can be either black or white (cf. the College of
> >> Cardinals choosing a new Pope), that meant red always moves first
> >> if it's present.
>
> > I hope nobody else learned that! It's the pieces now called black that
> > could be red, and White always moves first.
>
> We watched "Toy Story" last night. There is a very quick view of a
> draughts ("chequers")
American English "checkers".
> board that I'm pretty convinced had black and red
> pieces on it (my family tolerate me spending hours here, but I think
> winding the tape backwards to check would be going too far).
Red and black pieces are normal in American checkers. (At least for
children. I've never seen a high-level checker game.)
--
Jerry Friedman
tony cooper
<3-no...@temporary-address.org.uk> wrote:
>m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) writes:
>
>> R.H. Draney:
>>> Did everyone else learn the same rule I did for remember whether
>>> red or black (or red or white) moves first when you don't have
>>> actual black and white pieces?..."fire before smoke", they'd say,
>>> and since smoke can be either black or white (cf. the College of
>>> Cardinals choosing a new Pope), that meant red always moves first
>>> if it's present.
>>
>> I hope nobody else learned that! It's the pieces now called black that
>> could be red, and White always moves first.
>
>We watched "Toy Story" last night. There is a very quick view of a
>draughts ("chequers") board that I'm pretty convinced had black and red
>pieces on it (my family tolerate me spending hours here, but I think
>winding the tape backwards to check would be going too far).
Here's a photograph I took of some checker players at an outside table
under an overpass in Orlando:
http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Photography/Miscellanea/B-Color-CheckersOnParramore/708761716_KCpYr-XL.jpg