From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: dependent dependants |
Date: | 2001-07-18 22:06:41 |
Message-ID: | 14401.995494001@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
[ way off topic, but I can't resist ]
ncm(at)zembu(dot)com (Nathan Myers) writes:
> For the record:
> http://www.lineone.net/dictionaryof/englishusage/d0081889.html
> dependent or dependant
> "Dependent is the adjective, used for a person or thing that depends
> on someone or something: Admission to college is dependent on A-level
> results. Dependant is the noun, and is a person who relies on someone
> for financial support: Do you have any dependants?"
In order of increasing heft, my dictionaries have:
Webster's New Collegiate: no entry for "dependant" at all.
Random House: "dependant" is defined with a one-word entry: "dependent",
for both noun and adjective.
OED: entries for both "dependant" and "dependent", but it says "now
usually spelt [dependent]". Apparently the spellings were once more-
or-less interchangeable.
Not being an eighteenth-century person, to me "dependant" looks just
plain wrong. I'd never spell it that way, for either noun or adjective.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Lamar Owen | 2001-07-18 22:10:36 | Re: OID wraparound (was Re: pg_depend) |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-07-18 22:03:26 | Re: psql -l |