Copyright ©2003 by Paul Niquette, all rights reserved. |
Number of Words in the English Language
In early 2001, Fred Shapiro, Associate Librarian for Public Services and Lecturer in Legal Research at Yale Law School expressed concern that my estimate of 38,000 is too low, suggesting that the Oxford English Dictionary lists many times that amount. I shall take his word for that. The estimate of 38,000 English words stuck in my memory from some long time ago (38,006, perhaps, since I have added a half-dozen myself). Upon receiving Shapiro's query, though, I took down from my shelf The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, which is not the OED but one I happen to like a whole lot. Now, there are 1,491 pages with definitions on them. I did a quick count of the words defined on a couple of randomly selected pages and got an estimate of 25.5 words. You can do the indicated arithmetic, of course, but I'll save you the trouble: 1,491 times 25.5 equals 38,020 words. In the present context, I consider that number to be quite generous, since it includes entries like Aalborg and Zola, which ought to be excluded since they do not qualify as invented words capable of offsetting the paucity being lamented here. Mr. Shapiro expressed the belief to me that William Shakespeare used 33,000 separately definable words. I shall take his word for that, too. Assuming the Bard used all the English words available in his time, then people have succeeded in adding only about one word-per-month to the language throughout the past four centuries. One of them, as I have noted elsewhere, is "byte." Another, of course, is 'software.' {Return
to citation in Part 0}
{Return to citation
in Part 0}
-- Encyclopedia Britannca
Validity Not Necessarily Veracity:
syllogism
{Return to citation in Part 1}
-- Encyclopedia Britannca
{Return to citation in Part 1}
--
Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary
{Return
to citation in Part 1}
1947 D. R. Hartree Calculating Machines "The ENIAC. I shall give a brief account of it, since it will make the later discussion more realistic if you have an idea of some ‘hardware’ and how it is used, and this is the equipment with which I am best acquainted." 1953 A. D. & K. H. V. Booth Automatic Digital Calculators "The engineering difficulties encountered in this type of machine are great, and a considerable increase in the size and complexity of the ‘hardware’ seems inevitable."
Readers are invited to observe the exclamation point at the end of the next sentence. In a rapidly developing realm, it seems doubtful indeed that such an obvious word relationship would have taken more than a dozen years to be recognized! {Return
to citation in Part
1}
{Return
to citation in Part 1}
There was no verbal distinction in those days between a hardware failure and a programming error, both merely being deplored as "bugs." For some people the distinction is still pending (see Software Does Not Fail). {Return
to citation in Part 2}
In "Digital Computers" (American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 62, No. 6. Jun. - Jul., 1955, pp. 414-423), Mina Rees quoted the late Claude Shannon (1916-2001) as saying "a digital computer must be instructed in words of one microsyllable."
{Return to citation in Part 2}
Here is a partial list of the projects on which I worked during my two years (1953-1955) at the Institute for Transportation and Traffic Engineering.
{Return
to citation in Part
2}
Marilyn
Monroe and the API
Derwyn wore earplugs to prevent anticipation of the impact by the test car approaching from behind, and to assure that he would keep his eyes straight ahead, I affixed a purloined copy of the famous -- notorious -- Marilyn Monroe calendar upright on the hood. When the film was developed, we all gaped at the screen, astonished to see that, prior to the intended whiplash, the camera had faithfully recorded a hundred feet of Derwyn Severy grinning at a picture, which, though foreshortened, was all too immodestly discernible in each frame. It was my turn to get a sore neck when the experiment was repeated for presentation in public forums. Without the calendar, of course.
Nobody on the research team bothered to ask me what the letters stood for, doubtless assuming it was an arcane term-of-art. Finally, after publication of the first report, Dan Gerlough got suspicious. "Ass-Presence Indicator," I explained cheerfully. Suffering profondément consterné, Derwyn Severy promptly issued a memorandum mandating that replies to all outside queries must define API as "Auxiliary Passenger Interlock." To the best of my recollection, no reviewer or journalist ever asked. {Return
to citation in Part 2}
In a separate work entitled 101 Words I Don't Use, I have confessed to several coinages, including 'edutainment', 'circloid', 'holomorph', 'pluplural', 'patientoid', 'polycut', 'reprographics', 'totorial', and 'tridecabillion'. Not all of them were frivolous. {Return
to citation in Part 7}
Software never wears out, never decays, never gets weak. In terms of durability, then, software is not soft.
soft+boil, soft+copy,
soft+drink, soft+focus, soft+footed,
Some of these, along with undesirable properties of softness that are implied from other realms, act together to make ‘software’ a misnomer. ‘Soft’ means out of condition; flabby; not sharply drawn or delineated; lenient, not stern; weak; unmanly or, for that matter, unwomanly; informal; simple; feeble; easy; diminished in value or importance… soft+back, soft+ball,
soft+cover, soft+headed, soft+hearted,
Excuse the
immodesty, but shortly after I graduated from UCLA
in 1955, I foresaw the incomparable
"hardness" of software. That rather controversial
concept is celebrated in my iconoclastic screed
entitled Software
Does Not Fail. First drafted in the seventies,
the piece was initially offered in various versions
to any number of publications throughout the
eighties. Finally I published it myself in Sophisticated: The Magazine.
Here is an exerpt...
It has given me considerable pleasure that such a little polemic has over the years been cited in technical articles, popular texts, and system specifications. The title, which was once reproached as unsound, is now widely recited as a simple declarative (always with the "does not," never with a "doesn't"). That 'software' is a misnomer may be the reason for an apparent resistance to it in other languages.
Little wonder, considering the tepid connotations in 'softwords' -- softball, softcover, softener, softheaded, softhearted, softish, softling, softwood, softy. Meanwhile, you have the strength and perminence of 'hardwords' -- hardback, hardball, hardbeam, hardcore, hardcover, harden, hardfisted, hardhead, hardhearted, hardihood, hardline, hardness, hardscrabble, hardstand, hardtop, hardwired, hardwood, hardworking, hardy. Some 30 venerable examples attest to the popularity of 'warewords' -- agateware, barware, brassware, chinaware, clayware, cogware, cookware, copperware, crackleware, dinnerware, earthenware, enamelware, flatware, glassware, graniteware, greenware, henware, hollowware, honeyware, ironware, kitchenware, lacquerware, lusterware, metalware, redware, seaware, silverware, slipware, stemware, stoneware, tableware, tinware, tupperware, willowware, woodenware. The most colorful 'warewords' are all derived from 'software': abandonware, adware, beerware, bloatware, brochureware, careware, crippleware, firmware, freeware, groupware, malware, middleware, nagware, netware, postcardware, shareware, shovelware, spyware, vaporware, wetware. The following sentence has the exclamation point that belongs at the end of the previous sentence. For a misnomer, that's a fabulous foundation for creative coinage! {Return
to citation in Part
7}
That computer was also used by programmers for debugging process control systems. They were instructed to call me whenever the computer stopped. Soon a necktied figure would be seen running into the room, pulling out some printed circuit board, touching one of its components, waving it around, plugging it back in, and running back out again. My stratospheric reputation, though undeserved, was nevertheless thoroughly enjoyed, not to say exploited. Our first magnetic tape machine came with a "degausser," literally a black box with nothing more than a switch on it. To restore a tape to its pristine, unmagnetized state, one simply place the reel on top of the box, turned it on and back off again. An oscillating magnetic field, which radiated from inside the box, did the work. One day, when I was sure a couple of programmers were watching, I carried out a more elaborate procedure. I put a reel on the box and turned it on. I turned the reel first clockwise then counter-clockwise. Next, I slowly lifted the reel with both hands upward, higher and higher, then over my head, turning gracefully in a circle while stepping away in a solemn pirouette. Finally, I placed the tape on a nearby table and reached back and turned off the degausser. "Gradually shrinks the hysteresis loop," I muttered. "Eliminates glitches." You surely know the rest of that story. The degaussing dance was faithfully performed for years thereafter by succeeding generations of programmers, and then, and then... Witnesses are plentiful who will testify that the following incident actually occurred: Returning to the California offices of TRW from a year of research on air traffic control in New Jersey, I strolled into the computer laboratory. During my absence, the C-register read amplifier on the prototype RW-300 had behaved itself perfectly. A few minutes after my arrival, though, the computer stopped. Tah-dah. A new batch of programmers were waiting to be astonished. I could not let them down. Out of such coincidences, gods are created. {Return
to citation in Part 7}
{Return
to citation in Part 7}
{Return
to citation in Part
7}
A curious phenomenon that has
accompanied the development of software is a
tendency for the hardware to become dependent on
it. The amount and complexity of the software have
increased enormously in the last few years, and
its preparation has become a rather large
industry. {Return
to citation in Part
7}
Perhaps I might have been more
discrete, but to my close friends I described Xerox
top managers as... grim-faced officers standing in the bridge of a venerable vessel, steadily plowing the commercial ocean toward some unseen Valhalla in the distance, each in his sharply pressed uniform ornamented with gleaming brass and rows of ribbons, their caps and collars festooned with scrambled eggs, all eyes gazing at the horizon, hands confidently operating levers and wheels, each unaware that the controls were not connected to anything, that instead the equipment in the bowels of the ship had been welded firmly in place, and that a unique technological marvel -- a xerographic engine, protected by "the thicket of patents" -- would assure more than enough financial propulsion to conceal their own buffoonery. What good are metaphors if you don't mix them? {Return
to citation in Part
7}
The first giant brain equipped with a Teletype was the MANIAC. In a secret demonstration for a group of high-level Pentagon officials, a four-star general was invited to ask the machine a question. With two fingers, the general pecked the keys solemnly, "WILL THERE BE A THIRD WORLD WAR?" For a full minute, the MANIAC made whirring sounds, its panel lights flickering, then typed one word, "YES." The general and his entourage gasped. He leaned over the keyboard, frowning. "YES, WHAT?" he pounded. Taking longer this time, the MANIAC made more whirring sounds, its panel lights flickering wildly, then typed, "YES, SIR!" {Return
to citation in Part
7}
{Return to citation
in Part 5}
Another is
one from 1974 featuring a row of vending
machines. A sign in the background reads
"Baggage Claim," establishing the setting as a
transportation terminal. A terse placard
appears on one of the machines: "CHANGE." On
the floor in the foreground atop an open paint can
droops a brush dripping red paint. Defacing
the machine in crude, red lettering is a forlorn
battle-cry, "CONTINUITY!"
{Return to citation in
Part 6}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|