Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: help CES-ENG odborne a specializacni staze

Expand Messages
  • Melvyn
    The capitalization of words that refer to institutions or governmental agencies, etc. can well depend on who is doing the writing and where or from what
    Message 1 of 32 , Sep 25, 2012
      The capitalization of words that refer to institutions or governmental agencies, etc. can well depend on who is doing the writing and where or from what perspective. For instance, if I were writing for the city of Hartford, doing work on its charter or preparing an in-house document on appropriate office decor, I could capitalize the word City in order to distinguish between this city and other cities. "The City has a long tradition of individual freedom in selecting wallpapers." If I were writing for the College of Wooster's public relations staff, I could write about the College's new policy on course withdrawal. On the other hand, if I were writing for a newspaper outside these institutions, I would not capitalize those words. "The city has revamped its entire system of government." "The college has changed its policy many times."

      This is from an American source, but I think British usage very much favours this kind of practice.



      --- In Czechlist@yahoogroups.com, Charles Stanford <charliestanfordtranslations@...> wrote:
      > Afraid that I don't see the point. What about if you are talking about
      > Warren Buffet as "the Sage of Omaha" and then go on to talk about him as
      > "the Sage".... Try Googling that and every reference to "the Sage" is
      > capitalised. Interesting with Easton Municipal court - I think everyone
      > British would capitalise Court in that and in any further reference to "the
      > Court" (certainly in official documents). Anyway this is a bit of a
      > hair-splitting time-waster - we are getting a long way away from Helena's
      > question.
      > On 25 September 2012 12:35, James Kirchner <czechlist@...> wrote:
      > > **
      > >
      > >
      > > The Gregg Reference Manual:
      > >
      > > 308
      > > "Do not capitalize a general term of classification, even though it refers
      > > to a particular person, place or thing.
      > >
      > > common noun: our doctor the hotel the river
      > > proper noun: Dr. Tsai Hotel Algonquin the Colorado River"
      > >
      > > 309
      > > "Capitalize a common noun when it is part of a proper name, but not when
      > > it is used alone in place of the full name.
      > >
      > > Professor Perry but: the professor
      > > the Goodall Corporation but: the corporation
      > > the Easton Municipal court but: the court
      > > Sunset Boulevard but: the boulevard
      > > the Clayton Antitrust Act but: the act"
      > >
      > > See the point?
      > >
      > > Jamie
      > >
      > >
      > > On Sep 25, 2012, at 6:24 AM, Melvyn wrote:
      > >
      > > >
      > > > --- In Czechlist@yahoogroups.com, Charles Stanford
      > > <charliestanfordtranslations@> wrote:
      > > > I think that the Department of Paediatrics is a
      > > >> name so you have to capitalise it, even when abbreviated. In the same
      > > way
      > > >> as you would say "the Houses of Commons are in London. The Commons
      > > house a
      > > >> coffee shop".
      > > >
      > > > Seconded.
      > > >
      > > > BR
      > > >
      > > > M.
      > > >
      > > > _______________________________________________
      > > > Czechlist mailing list
      > > > Czechlist@...
      > > > http://www.czechlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/czechlist
      > >
      > > _______________________________________________
      > > Czechlist mailing list
      > > Czechlist@...
      > > http://www.czechlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/czechlist
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • melvyn.geo
      ... Hardly a surprise considering the manuals disagree among themselves, as you point out, and users freely pick and choose among them. I am happy enough if
      Message 32 of 32 , Sep 29, 2012
        --- In Czechlist@yahoogroups.com, James Kirchner <czechlist@...> wrote:
        >There's no unity at similar establishments regarding usage.

        Hardly a surprise considering the manuals disagree among themselves, as you point out, and users freely pick and choose among them. I am happy enough if I can show that a particular standpoint is sometimes applied in practice.

        >I actually know a very good web designer whose own website is the trashiest thing imaginable. She says it puts her right at the top of the search engine rankings, and that clients who see her samples don't care about her own site.

        The one who designed my blog pages (and received praise from rival web designers for them) told me she just does not bother with her own site.



        BTW bloguje.cz recently shut up shop without warning and now I have to find a new home for my blog. Any recommendations, anybody?

        >I've also read that matchmaking sites do better if they look cheesy. Again, people think there are humans behind the site.

        Freelance translators and interpreters often stress the fact that they spare the client agency complications and fees. Plain vanilla puts this point over better than any slick razzmatazz.

        Serious point about the complications, actually. I have had enough of agencies where the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing, so they repeatedly phone me up to find out what their colleagues are doing.

        >Nonetheless, if I see an agency site that is not well designed or is not at
        least an attractive, competently filled-in template, I tend to avoid the agency,
        thinking their standards are low in other matters also.

        Language would be my primary concern here. We all know of those outfits that brag about their own magnificence in broken English. If their texts look like they have been proofread then I
        can usually overlook the glaring yellow font on a goose-turd green background. You can sometimes spot the well-to-do by their grotty taste (viz podnikatelska baroka).

        >As an attorney told me yesterday, "You can't go
        wrong using standard English rules in a legal document."

        Does s/he ever use third-person "shall" in contracts? Hardly standard. You said previously that this is one of the rare places where "shall" is found in American English:
        >It is right that "shall" is almost never used in American English, other than in legal texts

        >This is not the way we did it at the communications companies. We kept about
        five style manuals in the drawer, and then we would do things the way we wanted
        to. If the exec, lawyer or writer complained, we'd pull out the style guide
        that supported what we wanted to do, take it to the person and point out that
        "the style guide" calls for our way of doing it. The people would immediately
        cave in, and nobody ever seemed to notice we were bringing them different style
        manuals in different situations.

        Now why does this not surprise me in the least? :-) I was going to make the point previously that all the complexities of title case present a nice opportunity to carve out one's own little fiefdom if one is so inclined.

        >>> Should long prepositions be capitalized? How
        > long does a preposition have to be before it is a long preposition? Etc.
        >> Four letters. They just have to look in the manual.
        >> NIVA prefers to capitalize prepositions of five characters or more.

        >I have never heard of NIVA, and a lot of web searching has not yielded any
        explanation of what it is or what its full name is. Do you know?

        http://www.niva.com/ ,
        which publishes

        And before you complain about how cheesy NIVA is as a source (pun unavoidable - or punavoidable ha ha), this was just one site I chose pretty much at random from several that basically say the same thing, e.g.:

        Capitalization of significant parts of speech of or more than four or five letters (preferences vary).

        Also, sometimes I am in the middle of a job and cannot go looking for cheese-free sites.

        >The kid watches this screwball English comedy for a
        while with a deadpan expression and then says, "Mom, that man's wearing a

        But we have been crossdressing like this onstage for centuries. :-) In English pantomime the female lead role is always taken by a male, and vice versa:

        The gender role reversal resembles the old festival of Twelfth Night, a combination of Epiphany and midwinter feast, when it was customary for the natural order of things to be reversed. This tradition is sometimes traced back to pre-Christian European festivals such as Samhain and Saturnalia.

        So now you see what the Pilgrim Fathers and all those puritans were trying to escape.

        > I am always amused by the way almost every real-world reference in the Economist is automatically followed by a brief explanatory clause, e.g. ...the Beatles, a 1960s rock group. For a long time I thought these helpful notes were an attempt at humour.

        >I doubt it.

        Of course not, but the effect of the indefinite article always amuses me. Queen Elizabeth II, a British monarch,...

        >Many of my American students born and raised around Detroit didn't know where Ontario was. If you go downtown and look across the straits, you see Ontario vividly on the other side just two miles away.

        Crikey, you could have spitting contests. Are Ontarians just as likely to be ignorant of Detroit?


      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.