RE: paleonet Welcome to The Palaeo-oological Discussion Group

["Xavier Panades I Blas" <cogombra@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thank you very much!!!



Respectfully,

Xavier Panades I Blas
55, Marksbury Road
Bedminster
Bristol BS3 5JY
England (EC)

http://www.acs.bolton.ac.uk/~xp1pls/
















From: "Robert Huber" <robert.huber@stratigraphy.net>
Reply-To: paleonet@nhm.ac.uk
To: <paleonet@nhm.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: paleonet Welcome to The Palaeo-oological Discussion Group
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 09:23:03 +0200

Maybe the paleooologists should start with an wikipedia entry?

 > -----Ursprungliche Nachricht-----
 > Von: paleonet-owner@nhm.ac.uk [mailto:paleonet-owner@nhm.ac.uk]Im
 > Auftrag von Gary Rosenberg
 > Gesendet: Montag, 18. September 2006 19:15
 > An: paleonet@nhm.ac.uk
 > Betreff: Re: paleonet Welcome to The Palaeo-oological Discussion Group
 >
 >
 > Xavier received a reply from Jeremy Marshall, an editor at the
 > OED (my contact there is Alan Hughes), and forwarded it to me for
 > comment back to the group. I'll let Xavier explain the editor's
 > comments on spelling and meaning of palaeo- compounds if he is so
 > inclined. Regarding admission of words to the dictionary, Mr.
 > Marshall says
 >
 > "As with any new formation, we would not add the word to the
 > Oxford English Dictionary until we had accumulated clear evidence
 > that it had become firmly established in the language, outside
 > the jargon of an immediate circle of specialists."
 >
 > In reply to my previous post, Xavier noted that the
 > Palaeo-oological Discussion Group was "founded in Oct 21, 2005,
 > and the word "Palaeooological" has been used constantly in
 > there!" The OED would regard these instances as specialist
 > jargon. If the word starts being used more broadly, then it will
 > eventually make it into the dictionary. Usage in a variety of
 > scientific journals (as opposed to only a couple) would probably
 > count. Better would be to get the word used in newspaper articles
 > about paleoological discoveries, such as fossil dinosaur or bird
 > embryos, or dating of archaeological sites from ostrich egg
 > shells. Most helpful would be antedatings of 2004, which would
 > establish that the word was in use well before the start of a
 > campaign to get it into the dictionary.
 >
 > The advent of the Internet has swamped the editors at the OED
 > with new words to consider, so their criteria might become
 > stricter. It's easy to find words that are not in the dictionary;
 > for example "orangest" (superlative of orange). Show me a
 > dictionary that lists it. Then try googling it.
 >
 > Gary
 >