We’ve discussed it before, but usually as a tangent on another thread about dialect differences. We know Brits (and affiliated speakers) use ‘maths’ while North Americans use ‘math’. Is this really logical though?
The argument is that ‘maths’ is short for ‘mathematics’, thus it makes sense to shorten the term with the ‘s’. I’ve tried to think of other words that do the same thing, but have not come up with anything except counter-examples.
How do you shorten “economics” econ or econs?
What other words are abbreviated the same way? I can’t think of any other abbreviation that works the same way-- delete all the rest of the word but then leave an ‘s’ at the end. Considering how we use ‘-s’ as an inflectional ending it seems like a very poor choice.
There’s nothing wrong with having an illogical abbreviation and saying, “that’s just how we do it.” English is full of stupid stuff. But I want to see if it really is logical or not.
Is there a precedent for this, other examples of this in English?
Not trying to bash British English, I’m hoping for some sort of resolution on this.
Covert operations - covert ops. They don’t call it ‘covert op’ do they? “Hi I’m the CIA head of covert op”. The Americans could at elats try and be consistent
[quote=“Bu Lai En”]Covert operations - covert ops. They don’t call it ‘covert op’ do they? “Hi I’m the CIA head of covert op”. The Americans could at elats try and be consistent
[/quote]
I think this is sort of the principle behind the British usage. The plural form emphasizes (or should I say emphasises) the many different disciplines within maths. Whereas in American usage, a collective noun, math, is used with the same meaning.
If only English were as simple as Chinese
數學 shu4 xue2 mathematics
經濟學 jing1 ji4 xue2 economics
生物學 sheng1 wu4 xue2 biology
化學 hua4 xue2 chemistry
物理學 wu4 li3 xue2 physics
Sure they do - when it is used in a singular sense, as in “The covert op was a success.”
‘Covert operation’ has both singular and plural forms whereas, according to Merriam-Webster, ‘mathematics’ is a “noun plural but usually singular in construction.”
[quote=“Bu Lai En”]Covert operations - covert ops. They don’t call it ‘covert op’ do they? “Hi I’m the CIA head of covert op”. The Americans could at elats try and be consistent
Brian[/quote]
As Neon Noodle noted (alliteration accidental), we add -s to the end of abbreviated plurals. bicycles->bikes, bicycle->bike.
But if something ends in “s” but it is not a plural, we don’t usually add the “s” onto the end of the abbreviaton. Since “mathematics” is generally treated as singular it is not the same as operations.
[quote=“Bu Lai En”]Covert operations - covert ops. They don’t call it ‘covert op’ do they? “Hi I’m the CIA head of covert op”. The Americans could at elats try and be consistent
Brian[/quote]
Covert op is short for covert operation. As in, a single thing.
Covert ops is short for the practice or theory involved in doing a covert operation. Both abbreviations are acceptable, though I suppose we don’t reference that first one so often.
[quote=“puiwaihin”][quote=“Bu Lai En”]Covert operations - covert ops. They don’t call it ‘covert op’ do they? “Hi I’m the CIA head of covert op”. The Americans could at elats try and be consistent
Brian[/quote]
As Neon Noodle noted (alliteration accidental), we add -s to the end of abbreviated plurals. bicycles->bikes, bicycle->bike.
But if something ends in “s” but it is not a plural, we don’t usually add the “s” onto the end of the abbreviaton. Since “mathematics” is generally treated as singular it is not the same as operations.[/quote]
The only good explanation I’ve heard about that is that a Brit generally can’t wrap his mind around an idea that math is a single thing and prefers to think of it as a group of studies. Somehow. I suppose that they would then prefer to study “sciences” rather than “science”, but I don’t have a Brit on hand to ask that to.
The only good explanation I’ve heard about that is that a Brit generally can’t wrap his mind around an idea that math is a single thing and prefers to think of it as a group of studies. Somehow. I suppose that they would then prefer to study “sciences” rather than “science”, but I don’t have a Brit on hand to ask that to.[/quote]
That would mean North Americans should say ‘physic’ for the subject.
puiwahin, while physics does fit with the other -ics in the pattern. It’s meaning completely changes with the suffixes -icals or ical. The others don’t seem too.
puihaihin perhaps you should take a physic before trying to drag us into a matter that is of no consequence to anyone who has ever taught, studied or learned anything about the English language. Both forms are quite acceptable depending on which side of the bench of childish pedantry you wish to stand on. I would expect a more masterful attempt at trolling than your latest offering. 20 (or 2 months)years from now, if a student of yours or anyone else were to say math or maths, would it make a whit of difference on a pimple on a dead donkey’s ass? The problem with all you self proclaimed grammarians is that you are too busy splitting hairs than busy yourselves with the business at hand of teaching these young people how to communicate in English. Too bad that a student of yours lost out on a fellowship in xyz because he said math and the people confused what he was saying because they expected to hear the word “maths”.
Instead of debating which one is better, why not just teach them both as being different from one another? This seems to be an isolated example that could easily be avoided as a conflict, and instead an opportunity to point out one of the differences between how it is said in one place and in another. It doesn’t have to be an ‘either/or’ situation, but an example of two correct ways of saying something.
That’s cute Rich! Should we say in one breath that my daughter is good at math(s)?
Would that verbally be, “math, (deep breath) maths” and then continue with the conversation? How should we pronounce math(s)?
Wake up and read my post. Of course it’s acceptable either way. Acceptable and logical are too different things, here though.
[quoteI would expect a more masterful attempt at trolling than your latest offering.[/quote]
This is not the first time you’ve accused me of trolling. I suspect the problem is that you are incapable of civility when people disagree and believe the same is true of others. So if someone brings up a controversial topic you label them “troll” since you assume the only possible reason for bringing up such a topic is to cause a disturbance.
I, on the other hand, believe people on opposite sides of the fence of a divisive issue can discuss things rationally and actually learn something from each other. On the other hand, topics like this are very good at derailing a perfectly good discussion happening elsewhere. That’s why I bring up topics like this in separate threads.
It could, if it were on a test or they need consistent usage of one standard or the other in a research paper. But this disucssion is not for the sake of students. A simple, “Brits use maths, North Americans use math” will work in either of those cases.
My question is simply to see if there is logic to the abbreviation or not. It doesn’t really matter which it is, but I’m curious to know.
The problem with critics like you is that you’re too busy taking shots at others to actually contribute to a discussion. I think I’ve only seen you make one constructive comment on a thread. All the other times you jump in with an attempt to be witty, which as often as not fails.
So, once again. Can you offer anything to discussion? You’re quite welcome to come up with a evidence for the British abbreviation being logical.
