Attention Clip Nazis!

It's not like you dont know what someone means when they refer to the clip for their gun.

Many manufacturer's of NiCd batteries/chargers would also refer to "memory", where in reality for consumers it wasn't true "memory", but voltage depression caused by overcharging in cheap chargers.

That didn't stop them from incorrectly using the term "memory".

Who cares what you call it. I call it auto loading bullet feeding system assembly container.

This is the best comment so far...

When you have enough misuse of a word, the meaning changes to include the misuse. An example of a word that is often misused is decimate.

Click to expand...

But it is no longer a misuse, as the language has evolved to include other meanings.

Since English is living language it is subject to change.

Click to expand...

YES, thank you

English wasn't "just invented" but rather it is continually evolving. further, language is not based off a dictionary, rather the dictionary is based off of it.

So eventually when the majority of people call it a clip, than that is the correct verbage, regardless of its history.

I suggest the "clip Nazis" consult a lexicographer, or at least read the first few pages of a dictionary before they post on what words are correct or not.

I remember when I was a kid and was always told that aint, is not a word....well guess what, it IS a word now..

from merriam-webster

Aint

Main Entry:
ain't Listen to the pronunciation of ain't
Pronunciation:
\ˈānt\
Etymology:
contraction of are not
Date:
1749

1 : am not : are not : is not 2 : have not : has not 3 : do not : does not : did not —used in some varieties of Black English
usage Although widely disapproved as nonstandard and more common in the habitual speech of the less educated, ain't in senses 1 and 2 is flourishing in American English. It is used in both speech and writing to catch attention and to gain emphasis <the wackiness of movies, once so deliciously amusing, ain't funny anymore — Richard Schickel> <I am telling you—there ain't going to be any blackmail — R. M. Nixon>. It is used especially in journalistic prose as part of a consistently informal style <the creative process ain't easy — Mike Royko>. This informal ain't is commonly distinguished from habitual ain't by its frequent occurrence in fixed constructions and phrases <well—class it ain't — Cleveland Amory> <for money? say it ain't so, Jimmy! — Andy Rooney> <you ain't seen nothing yet> <that ain't hay> <two out of three ain't bad> <if it ain't broke, don't fix it>. In fiction ain't is used for purposes of characterization; in familiar correspondence it tends to be the mark of a warm personal friendship. It is also used for metrical reasons in popular songs <Ain't She Sweet> <It Ain't Necessarily So>. Our evidence shows British use to be much the same as American.

Click to expand...

I have seen in Bill Jordan's book and one of Hatcher's books that they both used the terms magazine and clip interchangeably. if it is ok for them it is ok with me. quite frankly there are more important things to be worrying about than the differences between the two

The 'evolving language' argument is always intresting, even if it is incorrect.

If I call a dog a qureck, and it becomes the accepted term for dog, that would be fine, but if I call a dog a duck, and eventually everyone starts calling a dog a duck, it still is not a duck.

if I call a dog a duck, and eventually everyone starts calling a dog a duck, it still is not a duck.

Click to expand...

That's not true, if the majority of people call it a duck, than that is what it is. Course, this would never happen because it would confuse with the kind that makes a quaking sound. Language evolution has limitations. Annoyingly however, there are plenty of words used to describe two different things.

As you can tell from my previous posts, I'm a descriptivist (language is based on how it is practiced).

Those who prefer to correct posters on the magazine vs. clip, are more of a prescriptivist (language is codified and has rules).

The arguments over the two have been very heated through history, and predate any of the mag vs. clip argument. Neither can be really "correct".


from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prescription_and_description

In linguistics, prescription can refer both to the codification and the enforcement of rules governing how a language is to be used. These rules can cover such topics as standards for spelling and grammar or syntax, or rules for what is deemed socially or politically correct. It includes the mechanisms for establishing and maintaining an interregional language or a standardized spelling system. It can also include declarations of what particular groups consider to be good taste. If these tastes are conservative, prescription may be (or appear to be) resistant to language change. If they are radical, prescription may be productive of neologism. Prescription can also include recommendations for effective language usage.

Prescription is typically contrasted with description, which observes and records how language is used in practice, and which is the basis of all linguistic research. Serious scholarly descriptive work is usually based on text or corpus analysis, or on field studies, but the term "description" includes each individual's observations of their own language usage. Unlike prescription, descriptive linguistics eschews value judgments and makes no recommendations.

Prescription and description are often seen as opposites, in the sense that one declares how language should be while the other declares how language is. But they can also be complementary, and usually exist in dynamic tension. Many commentators on language show elements of both prescription and description in their thinking, and popular debate on language issues frequently revolves around the question of how to balance these.

Click to expand...

OP, you should also read some good stuff here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictionary

As opposed to Nazi which is waaaaaaay to all encompassing, a far better phrase (although still simplistic) is Grammer Fascist

From Fascist/Facism

An extreme (usually right wing) totalitarian political regime ideologically based on centralized government, violently repressing any criticism or opposition of the regime, leader cult and exalting nation-state and/or religion above individual rights.

Or are we talkin about ARFCOM....

If you have issues with someone calling it a clip. THEN,

GET A LIFE.

Aflac!

Yeah, there's even a name for it. It's called "Godwin's Rule" or "Godwin's Law."

Which states that any internet discussion, given enough time, will eventually mention Nazis.

Click to expand...

Ready's Corollary - Within 10 posts of the mention of Nazis, someone will bring up "Godwin's Rule".

Even if the discussion is actaully about Nazis.

And it's a magazine.

For desert, will you be having: 1) humble pie, 2) crow or 3) your just desserts?



Doc2005

Yeah, there's even a name for it. It's called "Godwin's Rule" or "Godwin's Law."

Which states that any internet discussion, given enough time, will eventually mention Nazis. The corollary is that the first person to invoke Nazis automatically loses the debate because of the sheer failure of their discourse skills.

By that respected internet standard, it seems in this case the OP managed to lose his argument in his original post. Very impressive.

Click to expand...

That is assuming that Godwin's Law is anything more than an empty elitist buzzphrase created to deflect criticism that many times is warranted. Note it is largely liberals that employ the term. They seek to distance their flavor of world "democratic" socialism from the nationalistic, two-fingered mustache brand of socialism. So they came up with a convenient "law" to throw in people's faces when they hit the nail on the socialist head...

I'm not calling you out or anything. I think there is something to the CONCEPT of Godwin's law and many times its employment is appropriate, but most of the time I see it used is to deflect valid criticism of behavior that can aptly be compared to that of the Nazis.

Like calling gun control freaks "fascist"...their behavior IS fascistic much of the time.

So just because a company incorrectly used the word "clip," we should now change the engllish language? Typical modern "thinking" from the government "schools." So because Remington put it into printing then it's gospel?

Clip this to your bulletin board:

Duck Tape: Origin manufactured 1902, a friction tape made of cotton duck cloth without adhesive. Used as a protective wrap for wires, cables, ropes, etc.

Permacel Tape: Originally developed in 1942 to seal ammo cans, gained popularity to seal ductwork after World War II. This is the cloth reinforced vinyl tape we now know as duct tape (or duck tape, for the descriptivists among us).

Duck Products company: Founded 1984, and had the foresight to trademark the name Duck Tape for its own brand of duct tape to take advantage of the confusion.

That's fascinating ants but not gun related, or thread related.

Is it a clip or a magazine....??

Does it really matter ?? I mean really, WHO cares ??.....get a real life people !!

hhersh said:

Does it really matter ?? I mean really, WHO cares ??.....get a real life people !!

Click to expand...

Of course it matters. Speaking correct English matters. Preserving our language matters. Understanding what words mean MATTERS.

I get so tired of the legions of people who go around claiming that things "don't matter" because they have nothing to add to the discussion.

For the last several decades, the government "schools" didn't think proper spelling and grammar mattered either. Now we have a whole generation of people walking around who don't believe in truth versus error, who have no clue what words mean, who think they can assign whatever meaning to a word they wish, and who go around trying to shut down anyone who speaks the truth or recalls history.

Does it really matter ?? I mean really, WHO cares ??.....get a real life people !!

Click to expand...

Obviously a defensive overreaction by one of those Philistines who call them clips...

Would you call this a magazine?



No, you wouldn't. Therefore differentiation is required.

Like it or not, maybe that should be, believe it or not, THR is a technical forum. Common usage does not trump correct terminology.

If your Gramps was telling me a story about the time he 'shoved a clip into his .45 and shot down the Hun' trying to kill him, I'm not going to correct him, I know he means a magazine and a German.

If I come to your house, and you offer me a cup of coffee, I'm not going to argue with you when you hand me a 15oz mug of coffee. I understand the common usage of cup, as a non technical term. But if you are a baker, I do expect you to KNOW the difference between a mug of flour and a cup of flour. And that you would not just accept the mug of flour because in common usage it is just a cup.

Gram and Grain, most people really don't know the difference. And in casual conversation(I really wouldn't care if they were writing and used Graham) it really doesn't make much difference which word we use because we know what we mean, but if we are sitting at the reloading bench it may be helpful if we both use the CORRECT term, instead of counting on us both understanding the common usage.

I don't care if someone puts up a post using magazine/clip interchangeably. It does concern me when well spoken, accomplished writers, cavalierly dismiss improper usage. In a technical environment, where matters of life and death are routinely discussed, proper terminology does carry more weight than simple common usage.

Just like I pray my Doctor understands the difference between hemorrhoids and a simple pain in the butt, it could save me from being put out in the bio waste bin.

Fun thread...
like
45Colt or 45 Long Colt

The only clip you will ever need, http://www.scaryideas.com/print/2960/