4 ms·
There are still modern authors who buy into this kind of argument. E.g. the late John Taylor Gatto, who refused to use footnotes because he thought they made re
by Alex3917 5y ago
There are still modern authors who buy into this kind of argument. E.g. the late John Taylor Gatto, who refused to use footnotes because he thought they made readers dumb. I forget whether or not his books have indices.
- gkop 5y agoSorry to hijack you but I can’t help my curiosity. Index: 1) a pointer 2) a structured collection of pointers Indices: two or more pointers Indexes: two or more structured collections of pointers (Where “pointer” is used in a slightly generalized sense, like “reference”) Yay or nay, pedants of HN?
- Twisol 5y ago"To index" means to point, as with your index finger. An index, such as at the end of a book, serves to point into the main body of the work. In this context, I think of an index like a mass noun; the whole thing serves the purpose of pointing, so one does not count the individual entries to quantify the whole. This is the same sense as in database indices, I think. I don't really make a distinction between "indices" and "indexes"; it seems more a matter of how integrated "index" is into English, since "indices" would be (I believe) the Latin pluralization, while "indexes" uses the more typical English plural scheme. They index (ha) the same semantic meaning in my mind. (We have the same issue with "appendix" and "appendixes" vs "appendices". It's telling that neither spelling bothers iOS as I type this.)
- zarzavat 5y agoThen you have octopus with many plural forms: octopuses, octopi, octopodes (oct-oh-pohds, oct-o-po-dees), octopen, octopees, octopa, ...