Re: The New York Times

On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:28:01 -0000, "Mike Lyle"
<mike_lyle_uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Shortie Longfellow wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 12:22:33 -0000, "Mike Lyle"
<mike_lyle_uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Shortie Longfellow wrote:
On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 18:25:03 -0000, "Mike Lyle"
<mike_lyle_uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Evan Kirshenbaum wrote:
Shortie Longfellow <longshorts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

That there is a widespread felt need for a more specific name
than the skunked "The Times" seems to be shown by Google's
getting "about 549,000" hits on the phrase "London Times" and
"about 4,300,000" on "The Times of London."

Guilt can't generally be established in a trial by Google, but if
you mean that an awful lot of people are either vague about it or
know that others may be,

There's nothing vague about knowing that people in Los Angeles say
"The Times" when referring to their local paper and knowing that
it's simply not specific enough to say "The Times" when referring
in Los Angeles to the "The Times" published in England. The
vagueness here lies in the British name "The Times" itself, which
has become vague despite any specificity it may have once had.

Language evolves. "Decimate" no longer means only "kill one in
ten," "aggravate" no longer means only "make heavier," and "The
Times" is no longer an adequate sole name for a newspaper.

Well, perhaps Mr Murdoch, as a celebrated nationality-shifter, should
bow to your acknowledged expertise in name-changing.

Bluster. Doesn't respond to my remark sensibly.

Bluster? More a cheerful recognition that a sensible response might have
been out of keeping with the proposal. After all, you didn't really
expect me to take seriously the idea that the paper should change its
name, did you?

I see, you're making a mistake of a sort that's not too unusual. At
no point did I propose that the name of the paper be changed. You
improperly inferred that from my observation that many people seem to
feel that the name it has is insufficient to distinguish it.

I don't care what the "The Times" management want to call their paper,
and I wouldn't dream of advising them on what to call it. As an
English user and a dilettantish student of English usage, I do find it
interesting to think about an entrenched name's having become
inappropriate over time. I incidentally find it interesting to see
some AUE posters' rising vigorously to the defense of the name without
acknowledging any recognition of its evolved vagueness.

If I write about Jane Austen's writing near the beginning of her novel
_Emma_, "young ladies for enormous pay might be screwed out of health
and into vanity," I'm commenting on a striking and amusing aspect of
English change, not suggesting that Jane Austen rise from her grave
and modernize her wording. In a similar way, when I observe that the
"The Times" name is no longer a sufficiently distinguishing
appellation, I'm not suggesting that the name be changed.

I've never had and may never have occasion to read the "The Times"
paper, and its name is in no way a direct inconvenience to me. Why
should I bother to suggest that it be changed?

then nobody would argue with you, even without seeing
Google counts. But that would not skunk it in scholarly circles,
where one's yea tends to be one's yea, and one's nay, one's nay.

Looking at Google Books, I see "The Times, of London" back to 1825
and "The _Times_ of London" back to 1833. "The London _Times_"
goes back at least to 1813. (That's the earliest I saw that had a
date I could verify was correct.)

Well, I quite often use the form "the London _Times_" myself:

I seem to remember its having been held here that the proper name of
the newspaper is _The Times_, so wouldn't a truly true scholar say
"the London _The Times_," not "the London _Times_"?

References and body text are not the same creature, and often display
differing stylistic behaviour.
[...]

Bafflegab. If you don't want to answer the question, why don't you
just refrain from posting?

You mean this is a completely serious conversation? Well, in that case,
I'll rephrase my sentiments, as follows. References such as
bibliographies and footnotes should be precise, and use the formal
titles of any publications referred to; such precision is not always
needed in general writing or even in the main body of an academic or
other specialist work. I'll be a little surprised if you disagree with
that. (I might mention that I have never needed to mention the newspaper
in a specialist work.)

Is the name of the paper "The Times" or is it something else?

When you write "I quite often use the form "the London _Times_"
myself," you are implying that the name of the paper is "Times," not
"The Times."

I don't really think so for any everyday context; and I hope I wouldn't
use the form where it was likely to mislead.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The New York Times
    ... There's nothing vague about knowing that people in Los Angeles say ... it's simply not specific enough to say "The Times" when referring ... Times" is no longer an adequate sole name for a newspaper. ... Google counts. ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • i cant keep doing this with out help, PLEASE tell People...
    ... Svp si vous ferez ainsi pour les USA, lui, elle ... Google de Cambridge http://www.fordvehicles.com/help/contact/ 12 mar. ... Arabic to English BETAChinese to English BETAChinese (Simplified to ... Arabic BETAEnglish to Chinese BETA English to Chinese ...
    (alt.fan.letterman)
  • Re: Mark Isaak & John Wilkins are frauds
    ... nonhuman ancestors was obviously known before 1858, among English ... you don't know how to use google. ... farther back you go the fewer books were produced and fewer books ... English-speaking scientists were in fact British, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Very unusual WR for Lenton
    ... certainly knew which "we" I was referring ... approximation at best was mentioned in the first place. ... many search results on the topic from Google. ... have any swimming skills or not. ...
    (rec.sport.swimming)
  • Re: Site maps
    ... I wondered if maybe I was reading it ... wrong but if two folk with such diverse opinion on written English as ... Count me in - that's third kind of English, ... Google seems well on its way to running the internet. ...
    (alt.internet.search-engines)