On Sun, 30 Dec 2001 22:49:13 GMT, Pete Turnbull wrote: #On Dec 30, 16:03, Louis Schulman wrote: # #> With all due respect, I disagree. The term "Centronics", whatever its #original meaning, refers to a type of #> connector. Looking at the Jameco catalog, for example, the catalog #pictures 14, 24, 36 and 50 contact #> male and female connectors, all referred to as "Centronics". I have #never heard the term "blue ribbon" used #> to describe these connectors. #> #No, Tony is correct. Just because a name is commonly (mis)used in a #particular way, doesn't mean it's correct, especially in catalogues. This #discussion has come up before in relation to "DB9" connectors etc. A #Centronics connector is a specific size, 36pins. The other sizes (14, 20, #24, 50, etc) are NOT Centronics connectors. Well, this type of argument belongs in alt.sys.language_police, not here. English, as is the case with most languages, evolves through usage. When does "misusage" become acceptable? When most people accept the usage. If you want to start disqualifying words because their usage began with misusage, you have your work cut out for you. Catalogs refer to these connectors as "Centronics", because most people (including you and Tony) know what they intend when they say this. If the catalogs said "blue ribbon" or "amphenol" most people would not know what this means. In fact, "amphenol" is usually used to refer to a type of coaxial antenna connector. Possibly you and Tony are French, who actually have a govenment agency to police word usage. Basically, you have no word to replace "Centronics", but propose that the name of this type of connector is dependent on the number of pins, which in turn is dependent on its usual use. I will give you guys the edge in computer technology, but on language matters, your expertise is questionable. (Note: For some reason or another, this note reads in a more hostile tone than intended. It's all in fun :-).) Louis

I'm sure I saw it as far back as the mid to late 80's. Ahh, but language is a constantly evolving process. The primary purpose of which is to convey understanding. So being technically correct, but failing to convey the meaning intended, is not good. Especially when ordering parts over the telephone? At least now with digital cameras ( or polaroids and scanners ) and the internet, we can transmit pictures to help convey meaning, if we have the time to do all that? Also, a meaning valid 20 years ago, may have become something different 10 years later. What is and what isn't actually correct might only be able to be determined by consulting a dictionary? Also meaning of words has regional variance within the same country, and even greater variance in some cases across international borders. And I wouldn't even be surprised if one might not find some differences ( although very few I'm sure ) if one were to compare many dictionaries. If I'm not mistaken, the Oxford English Dictionary would generally be taken as the "highest authority".