The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and keybinding

[Tim X]

George Neuner <gneuner2/@comcast.net> writes:

> On Wed, 3 Oct 2007 09:36:40 +0000 (UTC), bcd at pvv.ntnu.no (Bent C
> Dalager) wrote:
>
>>In article <85ve9ov971.fsf at lola.goethe.zz>, David Kastrup  <dak at gnu.org> wrote:
>>>bcd at pvv.ntnu.no (Bent C Dalager) writes:
>>>
>>>> In article <fdtsfu$iq6$03$1 at news.t-online.com>,
>>>> Frank Goenninger  <frgo at goenninger.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Well, I didn't start the discussion. So you should ask the OP about the 
>>>>>why. I jumped in when I came across the so often mentioned "hey, it's 
>>>>>all well defined" statement was brought in. I simply said that if that 
>>>>>"well-definedness" is against "common understanding" then I don't give 
>>>>>a damn about that clever definitions. Because I have to know that there 
>>>>>are such definitions - always also knowing that free is not really 
>>>>>free.
>>>>
>>>> "Liberated" is a valid meaning of the word "free".
>>>
>>>No.  It is a valid meaning of the word "freed".
>>
>>Only if you're being exceedingly pedantic and probably not even
>>then. Webster 1913 lists, among other meanings,
>>
>>Free
>>(...)
>>"Liberated, by arriving at a certain age, from the control
>>of parents, guardian, or master."
>>
>>The point presumably being that having been "liberated", you are now
>>"free".
>
> I don't think knowing the meaning of a word is being pedantic.
> "Freed" is derived from "free" but has a different, though associated,
> meaning.  Words have meaning despite the many attempts by Generation X
> to assert otherwise.  Symbolism over substance has become the mantra
> of the young.
>
> The English language has degenerated significantly in the last 30
> years.  People (marketers in particular) routinely coin ridiculous new
> words and hope they will catch on.  I remember seeing a documentary
> (circa 1990?) about changes in the English language.  One part of the
> program was about the BBC news and one of its editors, whom the staff
> called the "protector of language", who checked the pronunciation of
> words by the news anchors.  The thing that struck me about this story
> was the number of BBC newspeople who publicly admitted that they could
> hardly wait for this man to retire so they could write and speak the
> way they wanted rather than having to be "correct".
>
> Dictionaries used to be the arbiters of the language - any word or
> meaning of a word not found in the dictionary was considered a
> colloquial (slang) use.  Since the 1980's, an entry in the dictionary
> has become little more than evidence of popularity as the major
> dictionaries (OED, Webster, Cambridge, etc.) will now consider any
> word they can find used in print.
>

Language is not a static 'set in stone' thing. It changes and while some
may find the changes unwelcome, it will change anyway. Although I have no
evidence to support it, I suspect that 'free' wold have been more commonly
associated with meanings other than 'free of cost' pre-capitalism. Checking
a few dictionaries seems to indicate that its meaning along the lines of
free from restriction, control, freedom, liberated etc is more in keeping
with its origins than an interpretation of free of cost and that even in
that context, it meant free from the restriction of having to be paid for.

The bottom line is that free has different meanings and if a group decides
to use that term and at the same time specify which context it means it to
apply, then I think that is reasonable. Ask your wife what she thinks is
meant by a free variable and she may say that it is a variable that has no
cost (as in free beer), This doesn't mean that its use is wrong or
incorrect.

I once asked RMS why he chose free, given the ambiguity it would cause,
over alternatives, such as freedom, liberated or even unrestricted. His
response was that at the time, free as in freedom was the concious
association they had and other associations and resulting ambiguity did not
occur to them until it was too late. This seems reasonable enough. If your
focus was to ensure that software was free from what you perceived to be
restrictions that would ultimately reduce your individual freedom, then
free fits. The fact this has led to confusion amongst consumers in a
capitalist based economy probably says as much about modern values and the
changing balance between consumerism compared to freedom than anything
else. 

Tim

"The Americans are identical to the British in all respects except, of
course, language."  Oscar Wilde

Giving English to an American is like giving sex to a child.  He knows it's
important but he doesn't know what to do with it. Adam Cooper (19th
century)

"We (the British and Americans) are two countries separated by a common
language.  G.B. Shaw

The Englishman commented to the American about the "curious"
way in which he pronounced so many words, such as schedule
(pronounced shedule). The American thought about it for a few
moments, then replied, "Perhaps it's because we went to
different shools!"

Englishman: Its maths not math because it is short for mathematics
American:   Then you would say "Maths are fun"?

---
tcross (at) rapttech dot com dot au