Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

What's the Difference Between These Terms?

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Donald Rosenfeld

unread,
Oct 4, 2002, 1:33:01 AM10/4/02
to
http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/tsunami/Faq/

http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/general/lib/stormsurgey.html

http://storms.nos.noaa.gov/index.html

The difference between a "storm surge" and a "tidal surge" is that a
storm surge may occur with any state of the tide and a tidal surge is a
storm surge imposed upon a incoming high tide. This is my own definition
for tidal surge because I was unable to find a definition that I agreed
with. A "tidal wave" is a popular misnomer that is used in place of the
correct word "Tsunami".

frank1492 wrote:
>
> Could someone please differentiate between "storm surge,"
> "tidal surge" and "tidal wave?" I know what the technical
> definition of a tidal wave is, and I THOUGHT I knew what
> storm surge meant, but now the term "tidal surge" crops
> up, which Dan Rather says is the new term for "tidal wave."
> Or is this all just really sloppy semantics from people
> who wouldn't know a crest from a trough?
> Help much appreciated!
> Frank

frank1492

unread,
Oct 4, 2002, 9:08:04 AM10/4/02
to
Thank you Don. I accept that "tidal wave" equates to
"tsunami." As for "storm surge," fine too. I wonder if "tidal
surge" has a speciific definition.
So much for my faith in Dan Rather's accuracy!

Donald Rosenfeld

unread,
Oct 4, 2002, 9:53:26 AM10/4/02
to
You're welcome Frank; I did look up "Tidal Surge" in the "AMS Glossary
of Meteorology":

http://www.ametsoc.org/AMS/memb/onlinemembservices/index.cfm

and found no listing- hence, my interpretation.

There was a usage at:

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/weather/hurricane/sns-hc-saffirqanda.story

which you may find of interest.

frank1492

unread,
Oct 4, 2002, 11:02:26 PM10/4/02
to
So far, it appears "tidal surge" is a "coined" term that
has somehow gotten into mainstream usage, if it's not
in the AMS glossary. Unless the true definition can be
found in another source, it would seem that we can
define it pretty much any way we see fit, wouldn't you
agree?
Thanks again.
Frank


On Fri, 04 Oct 2002 13:53:26 GMT, Donald Rosenfeld

Donald Rosenfeld

unread,
Oct 5, 2002, 1:03:23 AM10/5/02
to
Well, actually, no; I think that the use of "Tidal Surge" is a public
misuse of the concept of "Storm Surge" which is recognized by
professional meteorologists to have a very clear meaning. But, in the
absence of a clear differing definition for "Tidal Surge" I am, as
usual, happy to extend to the Meteorological World the Rosenfeld
definition of a "Tidal Surge" which is as follows: "a Tidal Surge is a

storm surge imposed upon a incoming high tide."

The best person to comment further, I believe, would be Sim Aberson.

Donald Rosenfeld

unread,
Oct 5, 2002, 1:26:46 AM10/5/02
to

"A Tidal Surge is a storm surge imposed upon an incoming high tide."

Donald Rosenfeld

unread,
Oct 5, 2002, 1:45:24 AM10/5/02
to
Thinking a little further: here's an alternative definition, while does
not fit the public use which is a use that is interchangeable with
"Storm Surge", is as such:

Tidal Surge: "A topographically dependent abnormality of rapid water
rise on an incoming tide."

http://www.scottwalking.com/quickfacts.html

Donald Rosenfeld wrote:
>
> Well, actually, no; I think that the use of "Tidal Surge" is a public
> misuse of the concept of "Storm Surge" which is recognized by
> professional meteorologists to have a very clear meaning. But, in the
> absence of a clear differing definition for "Tidal Surge" I am, as
> usual, happy to extend to the Meteorological World the Rosenfeld
> definition of a "Tidal Surge" which is as follows: "a Tidal Surge is a

> storm surge imposed upon an incoming high tide."

frank1492

unread,
Oct 5, 2002, 9:26:17 AM10/5/02
to
Well, I am satisfied at this point. It will be nice to be at
a cocktail party and be able to correct someone who
tries to quote Dan Rather. (" 'Tidal surge' formally known
as 'tidal wave'...")

On Sat, 05 Oct 2002 05:45:24 GMT, Donald Rosenfeld

Donald Rosenfeld

unread,
Oct 5, 2002, 9:32:09 AM10/5/02
to
Great

Mark A. Mandel

unread,
Oct 6, 2002, 11:18:23 AM10/6/02
to
frank1492 (fran...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
: Well, I am satisfied at this point. It will be nice to be at
: a cocktail party and be able to correct someone who
: tries to quote Dan Rather. (" 'Tidal surge' formally known
: as 'tidal wave'...")

"Formally" or "formerly"?

-- Mark M.


frank1492

unread,
Oct 6, 2002, 10:41:58 PM10/6/02
to
Formerly, sorry.

On 6 Oct 2002 15:18:23 GMT, mama...@unagi.cis.upenn.edu (Mark A.

frank1492

unread,
Oct 6, 2002, 10:43:43 PM10/6/02
to
Come to think of it, I thought he said "formerly"
but now you have introduced doubt. Either way,
wouldn't he still be wrong?

Mark A. Mandel

unread,
Oct 7, 2002, 10:14:11 AM10/7/02
to
frank1492 (fran...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
: Come to think of it, I thought he said "formerly"

: but now you have introduced doubt. Either way,
: wouldn't he still be wrong?

I've often seen people write "formally" when they obviously meant
"formerly", but I don't recall ever seeing the reverse. The unstressed
"er" sound tends to lose its "r"-ness and become a(n "r"-less) schwa, the
sound in "form<a>lly". And IMHO yes, he would be wrong either way.

-- Dr. Whom, Consulting Linguist, Grammarian, Orthoepist, and
Philological Busybody
a.k.a. Mark A. Mandel

0 new messages