From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OmV58-0006oN-Q6 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 17:08:43 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7FD25E0972; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 17:07:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.informasoftware.com (173.221.47.101.nw.nuvox.net [173.221.47.101]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A4FDE0972 for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 17:07:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.100.48] ([192.168.100.48] RDNS failed) by mail.informasoftware.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 20 Aug 2010 13:07:56 -0400 Message-ID: <4C6EB66A.80100@kutulu.org> Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 13:07:54 -0400 From: Mike Edenfield User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.8) Gecko/20100802 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.2 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: [WAY OT] Parenthese, was Re: [gentoo-user] I can RTFM, but can I understand it: re elog messages References: <201008200038.10640.peter@humphrey.ukfsn.org> <4C6E8123.30301@gmail.com> <201008201558.21825.peter@humphrey.ukfsn.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Aug 2010 17:07:56.0658 (UTC) FILETIME=[3C016520:01CB408A] Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 3c5b9147-1da7-43d2-9362-3db14f865ccc X-Archives-Hash: cbcd74c3fe2d82fa3d92a86e05bc6b45 On 8/20/2010 11:40 AM, Kevin O'Gorman wrote: > As to the thingies, I enjoyed discovering that to many people a > parenthesis is not a glyph or punctuation mark, but instead the content= s > of the language set aside in one way or another. I had always regarded > parentheses as the round glyphs (), but this turns out to be normative > primarily in mathematics, computer programming languages and similar > fields. But I find several competing meanings and sources using > http://dictionary.reference.com/cite.html?qh=3Dparenthesis&ia=3Dluna > In American English usage, the three forms of puncutation mark have distinct names. Contrary to previous assertions, these names are not informal; authoritative American English dictionaries like M-W define "bracket", "brace", and "parenthesis" separately as punctuation marks. In British English they're all called "brackets", e.g. square, curly, or round. The Romance languages are somewhat varied, but they mostly use the Greek word parenthesis to derive their term for () marks; in some cases, that word is use for *all* brackets; in other cases [] and {} have separate terms: () =3D parenth=C3=A8ses (Fr.), par=C3=A9ntesis (Sp.), parentesi tonde (It= .) [] =3D crochets (Fr.), corchetes (Sp.), parentesi quadre (It.) {} =3D accolades (Fr.), corchetes (Sp.), parentesi graffe (It.) For what it's worth, Unicode defines U+0028 AND U+0029 as "LEFT PARENTHESIS" and "RIGHT PARENTHESIS" (also "OPENING PARENTHESIS" and "CLOSING PARENTHESIS"). --Mike