From e0c6872cf40896c7be36b11dcc744620f10adf1d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Norbert Preining Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2019 13:46:59 +0900 Subject: Initial commit --- usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_5/word.tex | 87 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 87 insertions(+) create mode 100644 usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_5/word.tex (limited to 'usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_5/word.tex') diff --git a/usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_5/word.tex b/usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_5/word.tex new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..bbee2459c2 --- /dev/null +++ b/usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_5/word.tex @@ -0,0 +1,87 @@ +\title{Department of euphuistic fewtrils} +\author{gleanings from the Chairman} +\begin{Article} +A mailing list long long ago in another galaxy +carried a missive from a linguaphile wondering +about the word `coaybtete-leranus' found in Microsoft Word thesaurus. +Later letters had many suggestions about the origins of the word. +Here are some selections from all the speculations, guesses, musings, +and expert opinions\ldots + +\section{Verify-it-first department} +\noindent\emph{Lee Dickey }: + Instead of `coaybtete-leranus' + I found `coaybtete-leranous' + +\noindent\emph{Helfrich Raymond }: + YES, my Mac Word 5.1 shows this synonym for common!!! + Disgruntled ex-employee on the way out? + Or, soon-to-be-ex-disgruntled-employee? + +\noindent\emph{Jeffrey Windsor }: + The OED doesn't list it either. I checked the Oxford English + Dictionary, 2nd ed., and found nothing near to `coayete-leranus.' + As a matter of fact, there is nothing between `coax' and `cob.' + And if it's not in the OED, it isn't. + +\section{To-err-is-human-to-really-foul-it-up-takes-a-computer department} +\noindent\emph{David J. Swift }: + I bet it's an algorithm belch. + +\noindent\emph{Bob Funchess }: + I suspect this is an artifact caused by the way many computerized + spelling dictionaries and thesauri store words. + +\subsection{Ask-the-source department} +\noindent\emph{Jason Reed }: + I called Microsoft, as I live in Seattle and the call is + local, contacted somebody in MS-Word (Mac) (206-635-7200), + anyway\ldots they told me that it was a unknown word placed + there by mistake. + +\section{It's-a-plagiarism-protection-device department} +\noindent\emph{Andy Eddy, Editorial Manager, New Media Group }: + Authors of reference material often put misspellings, fake words or + phrases into their work. That way, if there's a question of another + reference copying material, words like this would be red flags of + where the material came from and very strong evidence in a legal + argument. + +\noindent\emph{Thomas Hudson }: + \ldots putting in tiny inconsistencies that shouldn't interfere with + normal use (who's going to use `coaybtete-leranus'?) but would be an + instant tipoff if somebody steals their thesaurus database. + +\noindent\emph{Bernard Booth }: + When I ran my bookshop we often resorted to various versions of + Books In Print --- an extremely useful resource, we discovered, + however, that BiP was littered with bogus entries (which were + occasionally ordered by customers), the reason for this was to + provide proof of plagiarism if someone ever released their own + list. All D.J.Dwyer would have to do is to cite the deliberate + errors in the text to prove that it was merely a copy of their + own work. + +\noindent\emph{Lee Dickey }: + Map makers are known to include things in their maps that are + deliberately wrong, just to use in the event that they find a + blatant copy, because then they can prove that it came from + \noindent\emph{their} map, and not from other source. + +\section{Other-interesting-tid-bits department} +\noindent\emph{Jim Falconer }: + I tried re-arranging the letters, in case this was an anagram. + I came up with `Your Seattle Beacon', which seems just too damn + coincidental not to have been done on purpose (not to mention that + it was set up to be a synonym for `stodgy' or `dull'). + +\noindent\emph{Luke McGuff }: + I've heard that if you type `supercalifragilisticexpialidocious' + into an otherwise-empty Word document, you get `precocious.' + +\section{Conclusion} +Most of the responses suggested that the word was a deliberate inclusion, +designed to thwart unauthorized copying. That seems like the most valid +explanation. Thank you all for helping solve the mystery of the Word! + +\end{Article} -- cgit v1.2.3