View previous topic | View next topic

Dissected

Page 3 of 5
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Droid
520108.  Wed Mar 11, 2009 4:49 am Reply with quote

Quote:
A microscope you carry out disections with? The Swiss Army knife of microscopes?
That made me smile. I had a mental image of small blades flicking out of the staging area and whirling around. What I meant was, the microscopes you look down whilst dissecting small things. In my case, removing 2mm long leaves from Arabidopsis seedlings and trying to keep the stipules intact (a piece of tissue about 40-50ĩm long at the base of a leaf).

 
grabagrannie
520465.  Wed Mar 11, 2009 3:07 pm Reply with quote

bobwilson wrote:
Quote:

A microscope you carry out disections with? The Swiss Army knife of microscopes?

Are you being deliberately provocative, Bob? Or was it a momentīs carelessness?
Iīm with Quizmike on īloosingīand īlooseī
Itīs hard to say whether that is a spelling mistake or something like the misuse of "affect" and "effect".
If only children were taught properly! Correct English is easy to read. Some forums, less erudite than this one, are quite painful to read. I wince every time I see one of the familiar howlers.
I know there are much more important things to worry about, but now that Iīm retired, I have time to moan about it.

 
eggshaped
525043.  Fri Mar 20, 2009 12:56 pm Reply with quote

Interestingly, there is an obsolete word in the OED

"Disect: To cut asunder, to separate by cutting."

So perhaps Stephen was using this word rather than the word "dissect."

The prefix "di-" is a reduced form of "dis-" For instance, the word "Digest" has previously been spelled "Disgest" (as well as "desgest" and "disjest"). So the change from Dissection to Disection could easily be seen as a later version of the contraction that took place in the 16th century for "Digest".

s: OED

 
grabagrannie
525488.  Sat Mar 21, 2009 1:59 pm Reply with quote

Hey, eggshaped! Very interesting, but Iīm talking about currect usage. Please ask Mr Fry (somebody), if he was using the obsolete word "disect" or the current word "dissect".
How about Tagliatelle anyone?

 
mckeonj
525502.  Sat Mar 21, 2009 2:28 pm Reply with quote

Whatever clever lexicographers and linguists might say, there is a practical difference between the actual process of disection (bisection), meaning dividing into two parts; and dissection, meaning dividing into many parts and displaying them. The difference is well known to the people who actually do the job, and they will pronounce the difference.

 
grabagrannie
526284.  Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:26 am Reply with quote

Re 519245.
Exactly, Jenny. For anybody who knows and recognises the difference, to confuse the two words seems impossible. But I have the evidence to confirm it is so.

 
grabagrannie
526289.  Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:32 am Reply with quote

The one time I didnīt use the "Preview" button, I had to go back and correct the previous message! (But Iīve just drunk a bottle of red wine)
By the way, hardly anybody seems to get past tenses right - sink, sank, sunk, drink, drank, drunk, ring rang, rung. Just listen to people on TV and radio (who should know better) - theyīre all getting it wrong.
But I know, if Iīm in the minority, itīs me (not I), that is wrong.
OR It is I that (who) am wrong.

 
suze
526297.  Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:40 am Reply with quote

That should be "It is I who is wrong" ...

 
Moosh
526316.  Mon Mar 23, 2009 12:06 pm Reply with quote

Should it? You say "I am wrong"", so it is "I who am wrong", surely?Y

 
suze
526374.  Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:39 pm Reply with quote

You could say "I, who am wrong" I suppose, in an "I, who have nothing" sort of a way - but it sounds a bit odd and would usually be avoided.

The first person can often get a bit confusing - so if in doubt, switch to the second person. Would you say "Mr Brown, it is you who is wrong" or "Mr Brown, it is you who are wrong"?

Right. So similarly, "It is I who is wrong". (And yes, most people would probably use "me" rather than "I" in any case - but that is strictly wrong.)

 
grabagrannie
526378.  Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:44 pm Reply with quote

Suze, say it out loud, "It is I who is wrong" - Doesnīt that offend your ears?
It is hard to be consistent. If I ring a doorbell, and the person inside says, "Who is it?" I would say, "Itīs me," because that is current usage. To say, "Itīs me that am wrong," would sound worse than all the alternatives. Thatīs why I tried it both ways. :-) (creep)
To mckeonj, according to eggshaped, "disected" did not mean the same as "bisected". It appears to have meant the same as "dissected" - if eggshaped is right. I donīt have access to the OED, but it would be interesting to know when "disected" was last used (apart from, possibly, by Mr Fry). But the OED is more interested in when words were first used.

 
suze
526383.  Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:52 pm Reply with quote

Strictly grammatically, the only correct form in answer to "who is it" is "it is I", but almost all of us actually say "it's me". While I generally go along with the notion that usage presages correctness, I do struggle to accept - as this example requires us to accept - that "me" can ever be the nominative form of the pronoun.

No one would ever say "it is me that am wrong", would they?

 
bobwilson
526687.  Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:13 pm Reply with quote

Can I just reiterate - language is a tool - it is there to communicate. You can say "I am wrong" or "I was wrong" or "I is wrong" or "ghghghajkg kak kke" as long as you convey the intended meaning. There is no such thing as linguistic correctness. The only purpose of such systems is to identify people you want to hate for other reasons (in my case Americans, politicians, Met Police Officers and Peter Mandelson - the latter falls into no known category occupied by any other human).

 
eggshaped
526710.  Tue Mar 24, 2009 3:56 am Reply with quote

Quote:
To mckeonj, according to eggshaped, "disected" did not mean the same as "bisected". It appears to have meant the same as "dissected" - if eggshaped is right. I donīt have access to the OED, but it would be interesting to know when "disected" was last used (apart from, possibly, by Mr Fry). But the OED is more interested in when words were first used.


Pah, grabagrannie. I should think we've had enough correspondence that you can trust me by now; especially when I provide a source.

Anyway, I can't tell you when it was last used; there's only a single citation in the OED and it's from 1674; not far from the first citation of dissect (1607).

 
grabagrannie
526840.  Tue Mar 24, 2009 8:28 am Reply with quote

Sorry, eggshaped - no offence, I hope. I just was not certain that you had quoted all the definition of "disected" from the OED.
I really have to agree with Bob. Language is a tool. I honestly do accept that language changes. I regret it, most of the time. But there are some usages that are just so painful to hear (to my 60 year-old ears), that I just have to protest. Such as the use of "lay" when "lie" is required - "Just go and lay down over there" (Aaaargh!)
I get myself into difficulty with the me/I thing, as explained above. The "correct" form (to my ears) is "It is me who is wrong". Why the third person of the verb sounds "right", I canīt explain.
Suze, I would say, "Mr Brown, it is you who are wrong, because itīs second person.
Itīs just got to be "I who am right!"

 

Page 3 of 5
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group