-VISIT OUR OTHER FORUMS- OB-GYN-L Ultrasound Ultrasound History Fibroid Forum Physicians-in-Training Tech Talk OBSTET-L (portuguese) OBGIN-L (spanish) Nursing

Re: Gen: Medical Records From: Raymond Stephen (Stephen.Raymond@dhhs.tas.gov.au) Mon Jun 23 18:10:41 2008 Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ] Next message: Raymond Stephen: "English words (was Gen: Medical Records)" Previous message: Don Miller: "Re: Wordz" In reply to: Charlie Chambers: "Re: Gen: Medical Records" I am inferring from the order of words in your list that you regard "flammable" as preferable to "inflammable". If that is the case then I would beg to differ. The root word is "inflame" which is derived from the concept of "bursting into flames" or becoming heated. (Originally, it was more correctly "enflame", which has disappeared.) In medicine we of course use the word "inflamed" in the latter fashion. The cause of the confusion arises from the fact that the prefix "in-" also appears as a negative in other contexts, which may give the impression that the word "inflammable" means "not flammable". As there was never a word "flammable" until someone did the deconstruction, without understanding the origin of the "in-" part, it is the word "flammable" which is the incorrect one etymologically. Over the last few years I have come to realise that English, unlike many other languages such as French, has no codex, therefore evolutions and spirals, twists and turns have taken place, often differing directions in different countries, and that there is really no one correct authorised English. The history of the language from the days of Anglo-Saxon has been an extraordinary complex story involving adaptation and adoption from so many different sources at different times. Latin of course was the first modifier of Old English from about 50 AD, followed by French from the Normans, Dutch and German from the House of Orange, and since the early days of Empire the country, or colony, specific changes as English developed in isolation in the various far flung locations in which it was used. For that reason I have come to accept reluctantly that what sounds to me so incorrect and uneducated, such as "to not...", just might be another new evolution and one must not weep. Steve Steve Raymond Ph (03)62227329 Cell 0438372395 ________________________________ From: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net [mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of -- ________________________________ Charlie Chambers Sent: Tuesday, 24 June 2008 2:59 AM To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L Subject: Re: Gen: Medical Records Funny, how certain words and phrases become "pet peeves" for doctors. Here's the list of words/phrases from residency that was sure to attract attention. 1. Irregardless 2. Inflammable vs. flammable. 3. Bi-weekly 4. Incidental 5. Failed vs. unsuccessful 6. Fetal distress vs. Nonreassuring 7. Seized vs. convulsed. The list goes on. On Jun 23, 2008, at 9:52 AM, DoctorJoe@aol.com wrote: In a message dated 6/23/08 10:40:28 AM, rd.braun@gmail.com writes: As the dictionary says it is an ERRONEOUS word. * an erroneous redundancy for regardless. http://www.iolani.honolulu.hi.us/Keables/KeablesGuide/PartThree/Letters/I.htm * regardless; a combination of irrespective and regardless sometimes used humorously wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn * Irregardless is a term that has caused controversy since it first appeared in the early twentieth century. It is generally listed in dictionaries as "non-standard". en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irregardless Sounds like fun to me. Joe P. ************************************************************************ **** Charlie Chambers Hood River, OR cchamber@alumni.rice.edu "Almost anything you do will seem insignificant but it is very important that you do it....You must be the change you wish to see in the world" -- Mahatma Ghandi. ************************************************************************ ******* CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER The information in this transmission may be confidential and/or protected by legal professional privilege, and is intended only for the person or persons to whom it is addressed. If you are not such a person, you are warned that any disclosure, copying or dissemination of the information is unauthorised. If you have received the transmission in error, please immediately contact this office by telephone, fax or email, to inform us of the error and to enable arrangements to be made for the destruction of the transmission, or its return at our cost. No liability is accepted for any unauthorised use of the information contained in this transmission. If the transmission contains advice, the advice is based on instructions in relation to, and is provided to the addressee in connection with, the matter mentioned above. Responsibility is not accepted for reliance upon it by any other person or for any other purpose. Next message: Raymond Stephen: "English words (was Gen: Medical Records)" Previous message: Don Miller: "Re: Wordz" In reply to: Charlie Chambers: "Re: Gen: Medical Records"

Return to

Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Mon Nov 2 05:11:30 2009

The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.