In the UK, I tend to use 'carat' for both gemstone weights and gold purity. From my google searches so far, I understand the US uses 'carat' for gemstone weights and a mix of 'carat' and 'karat' for gold purity. For gold purity in the US, which is more common?
(The carrot is to distract the GD)
AJ
I've just done SOL searches on 'carat' and 'karat' and some authors use 'Karat' as a measure of the weight of diamonds and emeralds. Colour me confused.
AJ
Then use a dictionary:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/usage-carat-vs-karat
A carat is a unit of weight used to measure the size of a gemstone such as a diamond. A karat is a measurement indicating the proportion of gold in an alloy out of 24 parts, so 18K gold is 18/24 parts gold. However, the use of carat (in place of karat) to indicate the fineness of gold is also considered acceptable.
In other words, carats are gems, karats are gold, and carats CAN be substituted for karats, but it's not actually proper. But karats aren't gems.
Here's an explanation from someone in the jewelry industry.
https://www.larsenjewellery.com.au/blog/carats-vs-karats
"karat" is never used to describe diamond weight, no matter where in the world you are
They had been drilled out and a one karat diamond glued into the hole
She held up her hand, the half karat diamond glittering on her ring finger.
one quarter karat diamond earrings
a three-quarter-karat diamond in a marquis cut
OMG, SOL is extraterrestrial ;-)
AJ
Well, I have always thought that some if the authors were aliens.
Unfortunate. It is now time to disappear the carbon lifeform Arkage. Perhaps it is fitting the former lifeform Arkage enjoys the Swarm Cycle stories. Although, "The TRUTH" is nothing like the Swarm Cycle stories.
Arkage postings to be continued by a Chat GPT.
All other Carbon Lifeforms should cease dangerous inquiries about alie-- Authors on the SOL Forums. The CIA, the Phone Company, Fnord Motors, The Boy Sprouts, the Guardians of Area 51 (52, 53, etc.) and the Gnomes of Zurich; ALL assure the Sheeple that there Are No Alien Lifeforms (unaccounted for) on SOL. This mater is being handled by Top Men.
TOP. MEN.
Nanu Nanu.
But, "karat" is never used to describe diamond weight, no matter where in the world you are.
Yeah... I'm pretty sure the EU-Memberstates and Switzerland, which all use the "Metric Karat" as the norm for Diamond weight, disagree with that statement?
the EU-Memberstates and Switzerland, which all use the "Metric Karat"
No, they wouldn't. Because it's the metric carat, with a 'C', not a 'K'.
https://www.britannica.com/technology/metric-carat
…to standardize the carat, the metric carat, equal to 0.200 g, and the point, equal to 0.01 carat, were adopted by the United States in 1913 and subsequently by most other countries.
Looking at that site, I found a ring sizing guide which says:
Download our Printable Larsen Ring Sizer PDF.
...pointing to a .jpg file
I hope they state what dpi you should use when printing, because otherwise you could have some serious issues. Also, don't print to fit.
You may want to read this article: https://www.cjr.org/language_corner/carat-karat.php. It explains some of the history of the word.
Short version, "carat" was used for both gold and gems for about 300 years until the word "karat" was coined, probably for marketing purposes.
From the article you linked.
Aside from the variant spelling for "carat" early on, "karat" did not materialize in English until 1901, the OED says, when it first appeared in a jewelers magazine, leading to speculation that it was a public relations ploy to differentiate gold value from gemstone value.
Your claim that "the word "karat" was coined, probably for marketing purposes" seems to me to be a significant overstatement of what is actually said in the source you cited.
Correct, it is an oversimplification. That's why I prefaced that sentence with "short version". It was a quick summary for anyone who didn't want to read the who article immediately.
Correct, it is an oversimplification.
No, What you said about it was a misrepresentation of what the article says, not an over simplification.