I only just realised, looking at the preview of Office 2007, that Excel (both
previous versions and the screenshots of 2007) refers to "formulas." Maybe
I'm being a snob, but could we at least have an option to change it to
"formulae"? "Formulas" just sounds horribly wrong to me.

----------------
This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow this
link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
click "I Agree" in the message pane.

http://www.microsoft.com/office/comm...lic.excel.misc

Perhaps your suggestion would be better made to www.dictionary.com who
define the plural as

n. pl. for·mu·las or for·mu·lae

--

Owl Wrote:
I only just realised, looking at the preview of Office 2007, that Excel
(both
previous versions and the screenshots of 2007) refers to "formulas."
Maybe
I'm being a snob, but could we at least have an option to change it to
"formulae"? "Formulas" just sounds horribly wrong to me.

----------------
This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the
"I
Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow
this
link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and
then
click "I Agree" in the message pane.

http://tinyurl.com/kydox


--
Bryan Hessey
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bryan Hessey's Profile: http://www.excelforum.com/member.php...o&userid=21059
View this thread: http://www.excelforum.com/showthread...hreadid=540864

Yes, I checked that. Nonetheless, I have always been taught to use formulae,
and as I mentioned, using formulas instead sounds horribly wrong. I don't
know if formulas is more accepted across the pond, or whether I'm just being
elitist. In general terms, though, I do get mildly annoyed by software which
uses American English terms with no option to switch to British English.
British English is quite different, particularly in spelling - as someone
pointed out, we have far fewer Zs.

Pavement is indeed correct. If anyone's interested, autumn is what is called
fall in the US, and we speak of a car's bonnet while I believe the American
term is hood. I don't really know what terms are really used over there and
what is just reported as being used.

Also, as I've had to explain before, the academic year starts in September,
then runs through to July before we break up for the summer, ready to move up
to the next year when we return. Hence why all the Harry Potter books follow
that trend.

Lots of useless information, but maybe it's interesting to someone.

"Bryan Hessey" wrote:


Perhaps your suggestion would be better made to www.dictionary.com who
define the plural as

n. pl. for·mu·las or for·mu·lae

I agree with you. Formulas may be an accepted form, but it is wrong and
sounds horrible.

--
HTH

Bob Phillips

(remove xxx from email address if mailing direct)

"Owl" wrote in message
...
I only just realised, looking at the preview of Office 2007, that Excel
(both
previous versions and the screenshots of 2007) refers to "formulas." Maybe
I'm being a snob, but could we at least have an option to change it to
"formulae"? "Formulas" just sounds horribly wrong to me.

----------------
This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow
this
link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
click "I Agree" in the message pane.


http://www.microsoft.com/office/comm...lic.excel.misc

Well pardon my French ... or is that Latin ?

If it's in my American Collegiate Dictionary as formulas OR formulae,
It Does become MY choice, which I will not force upon you,
As I would not force you to follow my politics or my religion.

So, formulAS for ME!<bg
--
Regards,

RD

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please keep all correspondence within the NewsGroup, so all may benefit !
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


"Bob Phillips" wrote in message
...
I agree with you. Formulas may be an accepted form, but it is wrong and
sounds horrible.

--
HTH

Bob Phillips

(remove xxx from email address if mailing direct)

"Owl" wrote in message
...
I only just realised, looking at the preview of Office 2007, that Excel
(both
previous versions and the screenshots of 2007) refers to "formulas."
Maybe
I'm being a snob, but could we at least have an option to change it to
"formulae"? "Formulas" just sounds horribly wrong to me.

----------------
This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the
"I
Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow
this
link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and
then
click "I Agree" in the message pane.



http://www.microsoft.com/office/comm...lic.excel.misc

Rick,

Many words get into dictionaries because they become common usage and so the
dictionary adopts them, that is how language develops after all, and long
may it be so. But that doesn't detract from the fact that many such common
usages are unnecessary as there is already a perfectly good word already in
place. This is true with formulas, and worse IMO, it sounds horrible, it
doesn't flow in a sentence as formulae does, it is stilted and clumsy.

And anyway, since when has an American dictionary been the font of knowledge
on the ENGLISH language? <G

So FORMULAE for me regardless <ebg

Bob

"Ragdyer" wrote in message
...
Well pardon my French ... or is that Latin ?

If it's in my American Collegiate Dictionary as formulas OR formulae,
It Does become MY choice, which I will not force upon you,
As I would not force you to follow my politics or my religion.

So, formulAS for ME!<bg
--
Regards,

RD

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Please keep all correspondence within the NewsGroup, so all may benefit !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-


"Bob Phillips" wrote in message
...
I agree with you. Formulas may be an accepted form, but it is wrong and
sounds horrible.

--
HTH

Bob Phillips

(remove xxx from email address if mailing direct)

"Owl" wrote in message
...
I only just realised, looking at the preview of Office 2007, that
Excel
(both
previous versions and the screenshots of 2007) refers to "formulas."
Maybe
I'm being a snob, but could we at least have an option to change it to
"formulae"? "Formulas" just sounds horribly wrong to me.

----------------
This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click
the
"I
Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button,
follow
this
link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and
then
click "I Agree" in the message pane.




http://www.microsoft.com/office/comm...lic.excel.misc

<<<"And anyway, since when has an American dictionary been the font of
knowledge
on the ENGLISH language? <G"

Hey Bob,
The implication is that the King's English is something to be
"looked -up-to".

Then you'll pardon this O.T. quote, which I'm sure our "not naturally
English speaking Group members" might appreciate ... more then you or
I<vbg:

ENGLISH - ASYLUM FOR THE VERBALLY INSANE

We'll begin with a box, and the plural is boxes,
but the plural of ox became oxen not oxes.
One fowl is a goose, but two are called geese,
yet the plural of moose should never be meese.
You may find a lone mouse or a nest full of mice,
yet the plural of house is houses, not hice.

If the plural of man is always called men,
why shouldn't the plural of pan be called pen?
If I spoke of my foot and show you my feet,
and I give you a boot, would a pair be called beet?
If one is a tooth and a whole set are teeth,
why shouldn't the plural of booth be called beeth?

Then one may be that, and three would be those,
yet hat in the plural would never be hose,
and the plural of cat is cats, not cose.
We speak of a brother and also of brethren,
but though we say mother, we never say methren.
Then the masculine pronouns are he, his and him,
but imagine the feminine, she, shis and shim.

Let's face it - English is a crazy language.
There is no egg in eggplant nor ham in hamburger;
neither apple nor pine in pineapple.
English muffins weren't invented in England.
We take English for granted.
But if we explore its paradoxes, we find that
quicksand can work slowly, boxing rings are square,
and a guinea pig is neither from Guinea nor is it a pig.

And why is it that writers write but fingers don't fing, grocers
don't groce and hammers don't ham?
Doesn't it seem crazy that you can make amends but not one amend?
If you have a bunch of odds and ends and get rid of all but one of them,
what do you call it?


If teachers taught, why didn't preachers praught?
If a vegetarian eats vegetables, what does a humanitarian eat?
Sometimes I think all the folks who grew up speaking English
should be committed to an asylum for the verbally insane.

In what other language do people recite at a play and
play at a recital?
We ship by truck but send cargo by ship.
We have noses that run and feet that smell.
And how can a slim chance and a fat chance be the same,
while a wiseman and a wise guy are opposites?

You have to marvel at the unique lunacy of a language
in which your house can burn up as it burns down,
in which you fill in a form by filling it out,
and in which an alarm goes off by going on.

So if Dad is Pop, how come Mom isn't Mop?

Hilarious e-mail from Rag. I guess some of this comes from the fact
that English was derived from German -- the only language I know of
with eight words for "the"! And getting back to Owls' original
message, why do the English "realise" and Americans "realize"?

Zone
or in English English, Sone?

I never said it was perfect <g

Actually, you Americans should appreciate my point more than us Brits in
many ways. American English is far more old-fashioned than British English,
you maintain many of the words we ditched centuries ago, such as fall,
sidewalk, and so on.

And anyway, it's the Queen's English now <bg.

"RagDyeR" wrote in message
...
<<<"And anyway, since when has an American dictionary been the font of
knowledge
on the ENGLISH language? <G"

Hey Bob,
The implication is that the King's English is something to be
"looked -up-to".

Then you'll pardon this O.T. quote, which I'm sure our "not naturally
English speaking Group members" might appreciate ... more then you or
I<vbg:

ENGLISH - ASYLUM FOR THE VERBALLY INSANE

We'll begin with a box, and the plural is boxes,
but the plural of ox became oxen not oxes.
One fowl is a goose, but two are called geese,
yet the plural of moose should never be meese.
You may find a lone mouse or a nest full of mice,
yet the plural of house is houses, not hice.

If the plural of man is always called men,
why shouldn't the plural of pan be called pen?
If I spoke of my foot and show you my feet,
and I give you a boot, would a pair be called beet?
If one is a tooth and a whole set are teeth,
why shouldn't the plural of booth be called beeth?

Then one may be that, and three would be those,
yet hat in the plural would never be hose,
and the plural of cat is cats, not cose.
We speak of a brother and also of brethren,
but though we say mother, we never say methren.
Then the masculine pronouns are he, his and him,
but imagine the feminine, she, shis and shim.

Let's face it - English is a crazy language.
There is no egg in eggplant nor ham in hamburger;
neither apple nor pine in pineapple.
English muffins weren't invented in England.
We take English for granted.
But if we explore its paradoxes, we find that
quicksand can work slowly, boxing rings are square,
and a guinea pig is neither from Guinea nor is it a pig.

And why is it that writers write but fingers don't fing, grocers
don't groce and hammers don't ham?
Doesn't it seem crazy that you can make amends but not one amend?
If you have a bunch of odds and ends and get rid of all but one of
them,
what do you call it?


If teachers taught, why didn't preachers praught?
If a vegetarian eats vegetables, what does a humanitarian eat?
Sometimes I think all the folks who grew up speaking English
should be committed to an asylum for the verbally insane.

In what other language do people recite at a play and
play at a recital?
We ship by truck but send cargo by ship.
We have noses that run and feet that smell.
And how can a slim chance and a fat chance be the same,
while a wiseman and a wise guy are opposites?

You have to marvel at the unique lunacy of a language
in which your house can burn up as it burns down,
in which you fill in a form by filling it out,
and in which an alarm goes off by going on.

So if Dad is Pop, how come Mom isn't Mop?