Proper Names - Definition

Hello there ..... peek-a-boo .... guess who this is. Sorry, but I just can't get around to replying so quickly. On the other hand, perhaps I should be apologizing for answering at all.

>I didn't raise the issue of your bad spelling initially. If you want to know what the original point was, reread the post, and if you still have any questions on it, address them to the author of that post.

That's how I found out I couldn't see before Post 31.

>I do find it incongruous that one who professes to be concerned about the flouting of one grammatical convention doesn't take more care with their own grammar, ....

But that is comparing my forum grammar with finished art grammar is it not?

>I do think that any written matter that is full of spelling mistakes shows a lack of respect by the author for their audience, ....

I still find it difficult to see my posts as being *that* full of spelling mistakes.

>(just as I would find it hard to take seriously someone who was trying to explain quadratric equations to me if they'd first told me that 1 + 1 = 11).

Well, do you know what? I think that's the first time you've brought a smile to my face .... excellent (although I'm not sure you meant it to).

>Let's see if I can't clear this one up too, then (though I'm not hopeful):

You were right not to be hopeful Dominic, sorry, but I'm still lost with that one. I must be missing something fundamental here perhaps. I'd give up if I were you, I may be just a hopeless case.

>To me, this is a spectacular non sequitur ....

Sequitur! That's a gardening tool isn't it? Host, I think I've just been insulted but I can't find it in the dictionary :)

As I stated I think this needs another thread. The meaning of 'design' and 'art' I don't see as that clear cut and if we bring that into the discussion aswell we'll be here till the 2012 Olympics. Also I don't think there is a need because I reckon in general for the purposes of this discussion you could replace the word 'art' in my posts with 'design' and the point would still be made. For instance:-

>But in post 61, you wrote "there is a limitation to bending the rules for art's sake, and *that* is what this thread is supposed to be about". So, isn't figuring out what you mean by "art" central to what you say the thread is "supposed to be about"?

Good try, but I think if instead I had typed "there is a limitation to bending the rules for *design's* sake,", the point would still be valid.

>Because we were discussing designers' use of lowercase in logos.

Well, fair enough in that case, but as far as this discussion goes, is it necessary to draw a line between art and design?

>The impression it gives to you may be that, but can you not understand that you are probably not their target market and it doesn't give that impression to others? I really don't see how you can call yourself a designer if you don't understand this concept.

Well, I should be their target market because I have a car and I also restore cars as a hobby (in case you don't know, Halfords sell products for cars, and bicycles). You see, my argument is that this use of lower case for proper names may have some rare, very rare, times when it actually makes sense, but on the whole I think this myriad use of the effect has no sense to it other than fashion.

>Notwithstanding that, as I've said before, you should expect threads like this to wander. Otherwise, we're just left with a thread where Richard Archer-Jones says "I don't like the use of lowercase for proper nouns in logos", Heather says she agrees, and Herb, Thomas, and I say we don't agree. And that would be the end of the thread.

Well, that's a fair point if I had loads of time to discuss this and I didn't think we were boring the socks off other people on this board, but just like my views on art and design, it comes down to limitations and going too far off the subject.

>I'm floored! You spend all this time castigating designers for using lowercase when you have such a flawed understanding of correct capitalization yourself.

Ekky thump Dominic, that's rather harsh isn't it? Am I expected to know every rule regarding the proper use of capitals? (I'm still sure I've seen somewhere there was an exception in some uses of the word but some of my saved web pages on the subject don't exist anymore .... perhaps because they were wrong). Anyway, this is also not the point. As I've stated above, the point is not my knowledge of English grammar (whether or not my grammar is perfect on a forum), but whether I would deliberately use bad grammar in a finished work of art, or design.

>And I'm still waiting for you to tell me what all those questions that I haven't answered are.

What I meant by that politician comparison was when we get onto other subjects like me missing out the word 'most' and tending to imply that you actually *have* used bad grammar as opposed to *advocating* it, and hence getting away from the original question. (I can't see before post 38 now, so I'm having problems researching for this).

>..... but I do believe that it is the cost of the Olympics logo, not the lowercase, that is your real motivation in criticizing it.

Naaa .... I'm not that kind of person. I wouldn't complain about one subject by complaining about another ...... although I do wish your PC would break down :)

So, there you go Dominic, sort that lot out! I can't find the time to answer as quickly as you so you'll have to have patience with me. I don't think I should be typing posts this long. I mean, gee whiz, look at the length of it! There should be a law agin it (against it). I might have to restrict myself to just answering one thing at a time in future.

I see Dominic sitting in his lawn chair, cool beer in hand, waiting for the sound of company coming up the drive...<br /><br />Neil <g>

What makes you think it's over?

Well all that was an exercise in futility!

Entertaining though. :)

>Mmmm .... it seems to me that you are considering it right to compare my spelling mistakes on the forum to a finished work of art because of the number and severity of my mistakes.

Looks like I'll have to repeat myself yet again on this topic. Maybe you'll get it this time:
* I didn't raise the issue of your bad spelling initially. If you want to know what the original point was, reread the post, and if you still have any questions on it, address them to the author of that post.
* I never said there was a connection between spelling mistakes on this forum and the use of lowercase for proper nouns in a logo.
* I do find it incongruous that one who professes to be concerned about the flouting of one grammatical convention doesn't take more care with their own grammar, which makes me doubt your professed motive for complaining about the Olympics logo.
* I do think that any written matter that is full of spelling mistakes shows a lack of respect by the author for their audience, and I would find it hard to take seriously any comments that author might then make on English grammar (just as I would find it hard to take seriously someone who was trying to explain quadratric equations to me if they'd first told me that 1 + 1 = 11).

>Well, you've got me stumped on this one Dominic.

Let's see if I can't clear this one up too, then (though I'm not hopeful):
* You wrote the phrase ""we are discussing art, not science" in post 61.
* In response to a question from you, I quoted the phrase in post 93 as an example of where I thought you were stating or implying that designing is art.
* In post 105, you repeated my response and then asked if I was "classing design in with science"? To me, this is a spectacular non sequitur and I have no idea why you would think I was classing design with science. Perhaps you think everything is either art or science. In any case, the answer to your question is "No".
To sum up, I have certainly read your many references to "art" and "finished art" as references to designs and designing, and you didn't rule that out in post 92, where you wrote "Perhaps I did [state or imply that designing is art]".

>How did my comment "we are discussing art, not science" state that I thought designing is art?

Because we were discussing designers' use of lowercase in logos. If I misunderstood what you were referring to when you wrote "we are discussing", then please tell me what you were referring to as "art". Regardless, you have used the word "art" many times in your posts to describe commercial graphical works (eg, "In a finished piece of art it [spelling] could be AS important", "The same with visual art [in reference to Jan Tschichold]", "You are giving equal importance to the grammar in both mediums (forum and finished art)").

>I don't think we should get side tracked again ...

But in post 61, you wrote "there is a limitation to bending the rules for art's sake, and *that* is what this thread is supposed to be about". So, isn't figuring out what you mean by "art" central to what you say the thread is "supposed to be about"?

Notwithstanding that, as I've said before, you should expect threads like this to wander. Otherwise, we're just left with a thread where Richard Archer-Jones says "I don't like the use of lowercase for proper nouns in logos", Heather says she agrees, and Herb, Thomas, and I say we don't agree. And that would be the end of the thread.

>Can you see posts before 31?

Yes.

>Yes, the impression it gives is that it's following fashion ...

The impression it gives to you may be that, but can you not understand that you are probably not their target market and it doesn't give that impression to others? I really don't see how you can call yourself a designer if you don't understand this concept.

>Actually I feel sure I read somewhere that there is a time when lower case is used for words like 'english' and I had a feeling it was when referring to the language as opposed to the people ...

I'm floored! You spend all this time castigating designers for using lowercase when you have such a flawed understanding of correct capitalisation yourself. You can protest all you want, but I do believe that it is the cost of the Olympics logo, not the lowercase, that is your real motivation in criticising it.

And I'm still waiting for you to tell me what all those questions that I haven't answered are.

>Romance languages do NOT capitalize languages,

Nor names of months or days of the week.

>It had the choice of 'wonderfull' in the spell checker.

?? Not in any dictionary that I checked, unless a "y" is appended at the end.

Neil

>Look again. It's clearly there.

Mmmm .... it seems to me that you are considering it right to compare my spelling mistakes on the forum to a finished work of art because of the number and severity of my mistakes. Is that correct? If so, cripes, are they really *that* bad? Even when using the spell checker? I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that one because I think I'd have to make some pretty serious mistakes, and a serious number of them, to deem the forum / finished art comparison viable?

>Come on! You're not serious are you? You couldn't really have so badly misconstrued my comment, could you? (If you truly did, try re reading it slowly and carefully.)

What ... me? ... Serious?? ... Never!!!! Well, you've got me stumped on this one Dominic. I've gone through the threads and read it s l o w l y and c a r e f u l l y ...... and I'm still stumped. Now don't get angry with me, I'm trying my best really I am :) This particular discussion started from your comment "Actually, I don't even agree with you that designing is art" in Post 78? How did my comment "we are discussing art, not science" state that I thought designing is art? Does that not assume that what we've already been discussing is design not art? Anyway, as I stated in Post 92 "That subject perhaps needs a thread of its own" and I don't think we should get side tracked again, I've just noticed that I can't see any postings on this thread before Post 31, even when I click on 'Show All Messages'. Can you see posts before 31? (I guess it will go up after I post this). All my wonderful intelligent ... er ... sensible ...... accurate words of wisdom, gone! Lost into cyper space :( I think perhaps we have reached the memory limit on this thread and the big jaws of 'reasonableness' are creeping up behind us gobbling up our words.

>At least you're admitting that "Halfords" and "halfords" do convey different impressions to people, and the impression that is conveyed to the target market is what matters to the board or CEO.

Yes, the impression it gives is that it's following fashion, and I think we all know that our nations are like sheep when it comes to fashion. Sense goes 'out the window', as in the word 'unisex' and the ripped jeans I see for sale at the same price as perfect jeans.

>Shouldn't that be "English", Richard?

Ha ha .... you absolute rotter, you caught me out at my own game. Yes, I think it should be a capital. I messed up there. Actually I feel sure I read somewhere that there is a time when lower case is used for words like 'english' and I had a feeling it was when referring to the language as opposed to the people, but I've looked it up and the language should have a capital.

Nb. Do you know what? It had the choice of 'wonderfull' in the spell checker.

>Uuuh! Where? I see no explanation.

Look again. It's clearly there.

>You are giving equal importance to the grammar in both mediums (forum and finished art). Is that right? Is that fair?

Remember that it wasn't me that raised the issue of your bad spelling in the first place and that I've said that I'm not hugely bothered by occasional spelling mistakes in posts. However, where someone continually misspells words, I think it does show a lack of respect on their part for their audience (especially if they've indicated that they could ensure there were no mistakes if they wanted to), and I do find it hard to take seriously any comments they might make on English grammar. Is that fair? Yes, I think so.

>Are you classing design in with science?

Come on! You're not serious are you? You couldn't really have so badly misconstrued my comment, could you? (If you truly did, try rereading it slowly and carefully.)

>Let's try the one above, the significance of my spelling mistakes on a forum as compared to a finished work of art.

I said "questions ... that I haven't answered". I've answered that in posts 22, 60, and 93. As well, Herb commented on the subject in post 9, Heather in post 30, and Neil in post 94. I'm sorry that you don't understand the point that has been repeatedly made, but the fact that you don't does not mean that the question hasn't been answered. So, are there any actual questions of yours that I haven't answered that you do want me to answer?

>The 'halfords' logo gives the impression to me that the service I'll get there is likely to be not particularly accurate.

At least you're admitting that "Halfords" and "halfords" do convey different impressions to people, and the impression that is conveyed to the target market is what matters to the board or CEO. And Halfords may well not be looking to types such as Richard Archer-Jones as its target market - it may very well be aiming at a more brand-savvy, less formal, younger group, and Mr Archer-Jones's custom (or dislike of the logo) is of no concern to it.

>The english language is designed to confuse.

Shouldn't that be "English", Richard?

>I used the spell checker

Who's casting spells on you?