Member ist… Posted April 25, 2006 Author Share Posted April 25, 2006 > It would be impractical for a grammar and style handbook to avoid straightforward verbs like “capitalize,” “italicize”… good point. Link to comment
Member dez… Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 Well said Cerulean . ChrisL Link to comment
Member Ale… Posted April 25, 2006 Share Posted April 25, 2006 From the OED (the M-W agrees): trans. To print in italics, or (in writing) underscore with a single line as a sign that the word or words thus marked are to be so printed, or in order to emphasize or otherwise distinguish them.1795 PARR Rem. Statem. Combe 78 In p. 17 of his pamphlet the Dr. has printed, but not italicised another inaccuracy. 1858 RUSKIN Arrows of Chace (1880) I. 139 The words which I have italicized in the above extract are those which were surprising to me. 1865 Spectator 28 Jan. 100 The lines we have italicized are lines of very great beauty. 1871-3 EARLE Philol. Eng. Tongue (ed. 2) §30 There are no words in the Latin answering to the words which are italicised in the English version. Link to comment
Member pau… Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 are you saying that the (newer) bold button replaces the font with the true bold weight? the purpose of these buttons in most applications it to call the style-linked bold, italic and bold italic fonts. However, some applications (like MS office apps) may apply faux formatting if there is no bold or italic style linked to the font. Link to comment
Member Nic… Posted April 26, 2006 Share Posted April 26, 2006 Well put Kevin. It's also true that in the derivation of a verb from a noun or adjective, the first option to consider is using the word as is, unchanged. So, the word italic could theoretically be used as a verb, which is what happens with underline. So, "Did you underline/italic that phrase?" But given the choice, people tend to prefer a word which contributes to a pleasant rhythm in sentences (and also perhaps looks good and reads well), even if, considered in isolation on purely grammatical grounds, it contains redundancy. Underline sounds nice, no need for underlinify or underlinize. Link to comment
Member cer… Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 Nick, the past participle of "to italic" would be "italicked." I think that would have unleashed upon the world more horrors from the sort of people who can't pronounce "asterisk" or spell "etc." Link to comment
Member Nic… Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 That's my point, Kevin. And the plural, asterices :-) Link to comment
Member rob… Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 In Oklahoma we like to say Angleize or Angler i.e. Use them angleised letters or you should angler that there sentance Link to comment
Member Si_… Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 Interesting timing there's this AP story doing the rounds that's full of italics... US – “italicize” http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=entertainment&id=4121890 Australia – “italicize” - http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,18951600-13762,00.html Link to comment
Member Nic… Posted April 27, 2006 Share Posted April 27, 2006 them angleised letters But the French, not too fond of them anglicized letters, ennit? Link to comment
Member dbe… Posted April 28, 2006 Share Posted April 28, 2006 There's also an article in yesterday's N.Y. Times about the Holy Blood, Holy Cow trial in Germany. The judge put a coded mesage in "italicized" letters spread throughout his judgement, (a real pro!). My guess it was a true italic though, being an English court... Link to comment
Member dbe… Posted April 28, 2006 Share Posted April 28, 2006 Sorry, it's in England, Germans don't have stupid trials... Link to comment
1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now