On Aug 15, 8:30 am, tony cooper earthlink.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2008 06:56:30 -0700 (PDT), "jerry_fried...@yahoo.com
> yahoo.com> wrote:
>>On Aug 14, 10:47 pm, tony cooper earthlink.net> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 21:10:09 -0700 (PDT), "jerry_fried...@yahoo.com
>>> yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> It should be remembered that the now-disappeared OP is not the writer
>>>>> of this paper. He is the husband of the MBA candidate. He may be
>>>>> arguing for the term most understandable by the layman and she may be
>>>>> following the literature.
>>>>That's not what he said in the original post, and we now know
>>> Oh, but he did. The original post was:
>>> "My wife is wiriting her MBA thesis on Internet marketing, and the
>>> like. We had an argument about which form of the word "drugstore" or
>>> "pharmacy" should be preferred. To my knowledge, a "drugstore" is more
>>> like AmE, and a "pharmacy" is probably preferred by the Brits. If the
>>> whole work is being prepared in the AmE style (phrasing, spelling,
>>> etc) the "drugstore" seems to be more appropriate, right?
>>> Thanks in advance for your kind help.
>>Maybe I was unclear. My "that" referred only to the last sentence you
>>wrote. All I see in what you quoted is American versus British, not
>>technical literature versus understandable to the layman.
> I don't understand. My last sentence is me conjecturing about the
> nature of the argument. How can that be in agreement/opposition to
> what he (the OP) said? It conjectures about what was not said.
I didn't say it was in agreement or in opposition. I said it wasn't
in what he wrote. I think we agree on that.
> Why are you now using "technical literature"? I thought you were
> taking the position that "literature" is the body of previous writing
> on the subject.
Technical as opposed to popular.
> This usage of "technical literature" seems to be a
> reference to the brochures that companies print to provide information
> on a product. The body of previous writing would be journal articles,
> books, papers, etc and not stuff printed by manufacturers. That would
> include technical data, but not be exclusively technical data.
> Frankly, I have trouble thinking of marketing schemes to be in the
> field of technical data at all with the exception of the presentation
> of some statistics.
Ricardo's wife's thesis wouldn't be a marketing scheme (I imagine); it
might be /about/ marketing schemes. I'm sure there are technical
terms in academic business research for various strategies, methods,
and so forth in marketing.
> This emphasizes how the word "literature" fails when referring to
> previous writing on business subjects.
I don't see why. I had no trouble understanding it.
> It may work for the MA candidate,
> but (to the best of my knowledge) it isn't used in the MBA
198,000 hits for "MBA thesis" and 58,000 for "MBA thesis literature",
of which the ones on the first page seem to use it the relevant
sense. That's a pretty substantial minority.