4.0435 Trademark Neologisms (3/49)

Elaine Brennan & Allen Renear (EDITORS@BROWNVM.BITNET)
Tue, 28 Aug 90 22:16:06 EDT

Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 4, No. 0435. Tuesday, 28 Aug 1990.


(1) Date: Tue, 28 AUG 90 16:25:36 GMT (20 lines)
From: Ruth Glynn <RGLYNN@VAX.OXFORD.AC.UK>
Subject: Mr Biro

(2) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 90 10:18:49 -0400 (11 lines)
From: jdg@eleazar.dartmouth.edu (Joel D. Goldfield)
Subject: "Brand new names"

(3) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 90 15:32:39 CDT (18 lines)
From: "Michael S. Hart" <HART@UIUCVMD>
Subject: Re: 4.0413 Trademark Neologisms

(1) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 AUG 90 16:25:36 GMT
From: Ruth Glynn <RGLYNN@VAX.OXFORD.AC.UK>
Subject: Mr Biro

As I was sure that Biro was a man and not a firm,
I looked the word up in OED/2e (where else?).
The entry reads:

Biro. [f. The name of Laszlo Biro, the Hungarian
inventor.] The proprietary name of a particular
make of ball-point pen; also (with lower-case
initial) applied loosely to any ball-point pen.

First published occurrence was in 1947 in the Trade
Marks Journal of 29 October. 'Biro. Writing instruments
and parts thereof, not included in other classes.'

Ruth Glynn
Oxford Electronic Publishing, OUP

(2) --------------------------------------------------------------25----
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 90 10:18:49 -0400
From: jdg@eleazar.dartmouth.edu (Joel D. Goldfield)
Subject: "Brand new names"

These brand new materials will give my translation students food for
thought. I'm happy to see so many colleagues intrigued by eponymous
terms. Keep those eponyms coming (not that I was the one to first
ask for them, but I'll happily record them from the HUMANIST index)!

Regards,
Joel D. Goldfield
(3) --------------------------------------------------------------25----
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 90 15:32:39 CDT
From: "Michael S. Hart" <HART@UIUCVMD>
Subject: Re: 4.0413 Trademark Neologisms (2/51)

Kraft uses his "Webster's" which he claims to be be Websters, without
defining the term to a usable disctinction. We know he means Webster
CAN be used to refer to ANY dictionary, but he doesn't ever specify a
Merriam-Webster or just something based on old Noah's principles.

In my house we have to go even further, and we refer to them as First
and Second and Third (Merriam Webster International Unabridged): but
NOTHING other tham Merriam Webster's would ever get the term Webster,
at least around here. We also use the OED, Century, and Random House
dictionaries, and most of the rest are referred to as "junk" but they
are kept around for those occasions when wider or deeper knowledge is
sought.

Michael S. Hart (I still prefer the Second Internatioal Unbridged-MW)