Forum: Author Hangout

difference was between US and British English.

On a serious note, I prefer spellings that reflect pronunciation. I pronounce the word with a soft 'i'. A silent 'e' requires a hard 'i', so I would prefer the spelling to be 'adrenalin'.

I use "dialogue" to mean a conversation between two people; however when a computer pops up a window to ask/tell you something, that is a "dialog [box/window]". If it is asking, it can also be called a prompt.

According to Grammarist, "dialog" is a purely American variation, and refers specifically to a particular technical use in computer. While the word has migrated to other U.S. usages, it's not an accepted usage anywhere (i.e. it hasn't yet become widespread enough to worry about). Thus I'd stick with "dialogue".

By the way, anytime a U.S. vs. British spelling question arises, simply search for "spelling 1 vs spelling 2" and Google will lead you directly to the correct answer. Searching for the word alone will reveal nothing!

Incidentally, reading a story about American football there is a reference to "tailgating" which appears to be a social thing; over here it is an offence - you would at least get fined and perhaps lose your driving licence for being to close to the other vehicle!

You probably already know this, but they're two separate things. 'Tailgating' is when a group of friends gather around an open tailgate where they keep a large beer dispenser and drink and get each other reved up about the upcoming game. It's entirely possible to tailgate the other tailgaters with no confusion between the two.

As an American who programs for a living, I will do exactly as I said: "dialogue" is for people talking, "dialog" is for computer interaction.

I'm not objecting, I was just trying to explain where 'dialogue' came from and why it's spreading beyond its initial limited usages. However, I'm not fond of accepting word usage creep until it's a done deal. When I said, "I'd stick with 'dialogue'", I meant for normal conversations.

The way language is changing, I expect Americans to switch to exclusively 'log' in the near future and subsequently the whole English-speaking world following suit.

Catalog, Dialog, Prolog, Epilog etc.

AJ

How about cheesylog? ;)

AJ

How about cheesylog?

Don't worry, all of my epilogues are cheesy! Yummy.

That was a test for Ross if he's feeling playful. I had no idea what a cheesylog was until it appeared in my twitter feed.

AJ

The only thing more cheesy and cheesier than that joke is

How about Macaroni and cheese with extra Parmesan?

That would be Krafty.

or a Coon activity.

A few years ago, they ran an ad campaign aimed at kids claiming that their macaroni and cheese had more and better quality cheese than their competitors.

Oh dear, the archetypal 'plastic cheese' company has better quality cheese than its competitors? I really feel for Americans. :(

AJ

Kraft is a US based food companies.

Two of the biggest sellers of cheese and cheese products here in Australia are Kraft and Coon - I prefer Kraft singles and my son prefers Coon singles - yes there is a difference in the taste of them.

Ahh, I don't think Coon has a presence in the US

here's an article about it - developed by a US guy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coon_cheese

- I prefer Kraft singles and my son prefers Coon singles - yes there is a difference in the taste of them.

Here in the US, there is a difference between cheese foods and cheese products. The term 'cheese or cheese product' can only be used in labeling if the product contains a minimum of 51% (the number may be wrong) by weight of cheese. If the product has less than 51% cheese, it must be labeled as a cheese food.

This _does_ mean they have to admit it's _not_ cheese.

They don't have to admit that for it does contain cheese; but, far less than one would think. That cheesy sauce is far less than 50% cheese. Boxed 'Macaroni and Cheese' tastes bland and unpalatable. I prefer to make my own cheese sauce. Brand name is unimportant for they are all about the same.

there is a difference between cheese foods and cheese products.

By cheese products I was referring to things like Macaroni and Cheese where other foods are included in the package with the cheese. her, both of the companies sell both straight cheese and other products mixed with cheese.

By cheese products I was referring to things like Macaroni and Cheese where other foods are included in the package with the cheese.

That powered 'cheese' in the envelop has to have 51% cheese or it is a 'cheese food' here in the US. In the US processed foods require labeling to include the product's contents. The following are the contents of the cheese sauce in Kraft Macaroni and Cheese, and the contents are listed in order by the amount contained in the product. As you can see, the label indicates that 2% or less of that envelop of "powdered 'cheese'" consists of 9 ingredients and the last item is 'cheese culture'. So there is very little 'cheese' in the product.

Cheese Sauce Mix (, WHEY, MILKFAT, MILK PROTEIN CONCENTRATE, SALT, SODIUM TRIPOLYPHOSPHATE, CONTAINS 2% OR LESS OF: , CITRIC ACID, LACTIC ACID, SODIUM PHOSPHATE, CALCIUM PHOSPHATE, MILK, YELLOW 5, YELLOW 6, ENZYMES, CHEESE CULTURE)

http://whatisthatingredient.com/product.php?id=22

whey, milk fat and milk protein are what all cheeses are made from

I know. I also know that combining those items doesn't mean you get real cheese.

I suspect most of the consumers of Kraft products wouldn't be happy that their food has more culture than they have ;)

AJ

I always thought 'Kraft' is a German trademark,

I always thought it was named after someone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_L._Kraft

But his Kaftwerk is German ;)

AJ

But his Kaftwerk is German

Kraftwerk always produced better music than cheese (it clogs up the groves in the disks)!

I suspect most of the consumers of Kraft products wouldn't be happy that their food has more culture than they have

Yet, if that's the ONLY culture they have, do you really want to take it away from them?

Sometimes, you've got to let people have their weaknesses, since it shouldn't hurt you, regardless of how much they enjoy it.

* a name some crazy Brits have for woodlice.

Correct. A+. The lad done good ;)

AJ

SOL Advanced Search turned up 13 references, of which the majority appeared to be a variant of 'prologue'.

Bizarrely 'epilog' gets 134 hits.

AJ

The computer language Prolog was introduced in 1972. I don't think I've ever seen that spelling refer to anything else.

Without analyzing the statistical analysis of literature, there's no telling whether the 'acceptance of "prolog"' as an acceptable spelling is based on the computer programming language in manuals and training guides or not.

I can't recall ever seeing an introductory chapter in a novel being called a "Prolog" before. If I did, I'd assume the author had no clue what he was doing and had never read much.

the use of prolog and epilog for special opening and closing chapters of books has always been negligible.

Good. I feel vindicated. Though it looks like quite a few people in the early 90s decided they'd jump the gun on adopting new 'Americanized' words before anyone else even considered it.

I suspect it is limited to printed books, which would mean the results only prove publishers have never been willing to accept either 'prolog' or 'epilog'.

That was my initial thought, but the distaste for prologues is a relatively recent fad and they're still common in crime and thriller fiction - James Patterson, for instance.

AJ

I have no knowledge about any distaste for prologues.

The course junkies say it's routinely taught on creative writing courses nowadays that drip-feeding information into the flow of a story far better than a brain-dump prologue.

I take the view, as do some of my friends, that a brain-dump prologue is sometimes a better option on the basis that readers tend to skip over them but can always go back if they discover they're missing something vital.

AJ

One thing I have seen is stories that need a 3-POV introduction before the rest is in 1-POV. I think those should be called prologues.

And I think the only ones qualified to write prologues are paid forest woodcutters.

Did they also tell you why a prologue has to be a 'brain-dump' (I assume that's the same as an 'info-dump'?).

A prologue doesn't have to be an info dump, but if an author's going to do an info dump, stashing it away, from the story narrative makes sense to me.

IMO it's part of the same 'rebellion' against telling, rather than showing, which I believe was caused by stories reading like history books and boring the readers.

AJ

I'm not one of the readers who skip the prologue and start reading at chapter one. To me the prologue is a part of the story, and the first part at that, which means it's a reader's first impression of a story. If the prologue is totally botched I never even read chapter one.

That catches the entire discussion. A badly written prologue, featuring the proverbial info-dump means readers will never progress to the actual story, while simultaneously helping ensure they'll never read another one.

There are a variety of techniques to minimize info-dumps, IF they're required at all, but most authors are simply interested in dumping 'the boring stuff' so they can get on with the story, meaning the author themselves don't consider the prologue worth reading!

The course junkies say it's routinely taught on creative writing courses nowadays that drip-feeding information into the flow of a story far better than a brain-dump prologue.

I take the view, as do some of my friends, that a brain-dump prologue is sometimes a better option on the basis that readers tend to skip over them but can always go back if they discover they're missing something vital.

I view it differently. It's all a matter of how reader process information. If you can break down the essential information into bite-sized chucks, so they can process each idea before jumping into the next complex concept, your story will be better understood.

Too often, the 'brain-dump' background stories simply try to dump all the author's research right upfront, when readers simply want to be sold on the story. If nothing else, authors need to consider how much is too much, and how little isn't enough. Nothing says you have to dump everything all at once, just as nothing says you have to strip out essential information.

The one thing you've always got to remember is that it has to be well presented. If the author never readers the prologue, there's really no reason is providing one.

That was my initial thought, but the distaste for prologues is a relatively recent fad and they're still common in crime and thriller fiction - James Patterson, for instance.

Even in sci-fi, with a long and rich history of prologues to set up a story and epilogues to wrap up and explain how the story impacts everyone else, it's almost impossible to get readers to open and read one.

Instead, if you write a prologue, the story CAN'T depend on it, because at best you'll only get 20 to 30% of readers to glance at it. Epilogues are a different matter, because if readers have stuck around long enough to read the entire story, they're still curious about how things 'work out', so they'll keep reading.

Frankly, I doubt ANY prologue was ever the most read chapter in ANY book. Readers must be trained to consider them (they often think there's no difference between a prologue and a preface), and even then, they tend to skip over anything they see as 'not getting directly into the action'.

If readers come to your stories from another genre, which doesn't rely on prologues, you can forget their reading one. Still, well-executed, prologues can add a LOT to a story, but it's almost become a science how to write one, as there are certain things you need to do, and things you should NEVER do in one.

the distaste for prologues is a relatively recent fad and they're still common in crime and thriller fiction - James Patterson, for instance.

It's not like Patterson writes his own books anymore, though. He comes up with the plot and a detailed outline, then gives it to someone else to finish.

The way language is changing, I expect Americans to switch to exclusively 'log' in the near future and subsequently the whole English-speaking world following suit.

Alas, readers are sticklers, they like consistency. While the rest of the public may switch over time, I doubt words like "dialogue", "prologue" or "epilogue" will change nearly as fast. However, that may be more blind trust than a realistic evaluation.

I learned that language in college, though I've since forgotten most of it

It was abandoned, because of the misspellings.

As an American writer of both novels and computer programs, I'll second this. When your computer pops up a window in the middle of your screen and forces you to make a selection before it'll continue doing what you told it to, that's a "dialog box", and I'd consider "dialogue box" to be incorrect.

At least until Alexa starts having in-depth discussions, then it would be a 'dialogue cylinder'.

"Alexa, suck my dick."

"I'm sorry, I do not have enough information to..."

"Here, let me help you understand with a friendly demonstration as a spluge all over your pretty display."

I think "adrenaline" because I didn't know you could spell it the other way.

How about: catalog/catalogue and dialog/dialogue?

All of the above are correct, but I use "catalog" and "dialogue." Go figure.

Split the difference and go for "adrenalogue"! 'D

But I suspect it's yet another U.S. vs. British Empire difference. Though, technically, "Adrenalin" is a Trademark, NOT the actual name of the chemical but the brand name of a synthetic. I imagine it's regional usage is affected by where Adranalin was first developed and marketed, causing it to be treated like "aspirin", where the brand names becomes the generic name.

I'd stick with "adrenaline" (lowercase "A"), as it's the actual name of the naturally occurring chemical in the body, rather than a trademarked brand name.

I think this thread has run it's course and should be put to sleep.

That's obvious. All the outstanding questions, seeking assistance, were answers a LONG time ago. Now, the regulars are all fighting with each other over who can belittle the others with their little understood puns.