Hello!

I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.

In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).

I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document 
representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".

Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the 
noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a 
plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able to 
talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their properties).

My question is:
1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
sense only?
2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
3. Any other suggestions

Kind regards

Michael

Michael Preminger wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the
> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a
> plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able
> to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
> properties).
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
> institutional sense only?

Yes. Organization in the sense, "I need more organization in my life' is 
always in the singular, like 'information' and other words. That sis 'I 
need to organise my life better'.In the institutional sense there is no 
problem for there it means more structures/organizations rather than the 
'attitude' organization.

> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

You don't need any, in the sense "data (or information) organization" 
you'll always be in the 'singular' (collective if you like).

John of Aix wrote:
> Michael Preminger wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>> to use the
>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>> properties).
>> My question is:
>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>> institutional sense only?
>
> Yes. Organization in the sense, "I need more organization in my life'
> is always in the singular, like 'information' and other words. That
> sis 'I need to organise my life better'.In the institutional sense
> there is no problem for there it means more structures/organizations
> rather than the 'attitude' organization.
>
>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>> 3. Any other suggestions
>
> You don't need any, in the sense "data (or information) organization"
> you'll always be in the 'singular' (collective if you like).

Yes, but he was misusing the term in "a data organization" when he meant "a 
data structure" or "a data arrangement" (it is a bit of a puzzle as to why 
"arrangement" shouldn't be open to the same sort of criticism as 
"organization"...)
-- 
John Briggs

Michael Preminger wrote:

> 
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions
> 


Data organization systems ?

-- 
Blue Sow

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).

In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.

There are many other differences in the way the language is used, and in the 
ways that we communicate between ourselves in the UK, so this is the wrong 
place for you to ask such a question.

Seek an appropriate group.

Mark Wallace wrote:
> "Michael Preminger"  wrote in message
> news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.

Not always - but I always do, if only to annoy Americans :-)
-- 
John Briggs

John Briggs schrieb:
> Mark Wallace wrote:
> 
>>"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message
>>news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>>
>>>Hello!
>>>
>>>I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>
>>>In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>>In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.
> 
> 
> Not always - but I always do, if only to annoy Americans :-)

I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and the 
OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a second 
language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are simpler.

Regards, Einde O'Callaghan

In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a second
>language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are simpler.

All you wanted to know, and more, here:

  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206

-- 
Mike Barnes

Michael Preminger wrote:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

"Different schemes of data organisation", "methods of...", "patterns 
of...", or even the dreaded "paradigms of...", would be my choice. I 
take it that "data structures" would be far too specific, and you are 
talking about networks of interlinked data structures.

Paul Burke

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document 
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the noun 
> "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a plural 
> for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able to talk 
> about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their properties).
>
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions
>

ad 3: array, disposition, formation

-- 
Noel

Mike Barnes wrote:
> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>> the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a
>> second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are
>> simpler.
>
> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>
>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206

At least two of those are wrong.
-- 
John Briggs

In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>>> the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a
>>> second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are
>>> simpler.
>>
>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>
>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>
>At least two of those are wrong.

In what respect?

-- 
Mike Barnes

Michael Preminger wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the
> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a
> plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able
> to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
> properties).
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
> institutional sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word in a 
new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what you are 
doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more familiar settings 
and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you would be better to coin a 
new phrase that avoids the problem, or use a word that doesn't present the 
problem.  How about "data tree"?

I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.  To 
algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain 
varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty meaningless 
without the plural "Algebras".


-- 
Mike Stevens
narrowboat Felis Catus III
web-site www.mike-stevens.co.uk

Defend the waterways.
Visit the web site www.saveourwaterways.org.uk

Mike Barnes wrote:
> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>> are simpler.
>>>
>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>
>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>
>> At least two of those are wrong.
>
> In what respect?

"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.

We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.
-- 
John Briggs

Mike Stevens wrote:
> Michael Preminger wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>> to use the
>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>> properties).
>> My question is:
>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>> institutional sense only?
>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>> 3. Any other suggestions
>
> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word
> in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what
> you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more
> familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you
> would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the problem, or use
> a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about "data tree"?
>
> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.
> To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain
> varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty
> meaningless without the plural "Algebras".

"these"?
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote in message 
news:L9F4i.496$qD.294@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
> Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>
>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>
>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>
>> In what respect?
>
> "Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.
>
> We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.

We appear to be in this thread.  Let's nay let the -ize have it!

In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>
>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>
>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>
>> In what respect?
>
>"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.

Where does any of them state that it is?

>We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.

How do you know?

-- 
Mike Barnes

"Mike Barnes"  wrote in message 
news:6OOASEFiozUGFw1y@g52lk5g23lkgk3lk345g.invalid...
> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>>
>>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>>
>>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>>
>>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>>
>>> In what respect?
>>
>>"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.
>
> Where does any of them state that it is?
>
>>We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.
>
> How do you know?

Pick up an English newspaper; they're where bad habits first rear their ugly 
heads.  I see no indication of "~ize" being used more frequently, or with 
different words, than before.

On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
 wrote:

>Mike Stevens wrote:
>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>
>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>
>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>>> to use the
>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>> properties).
>>> My question is:
>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>> institutional sense only?
>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>
>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word
>> in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what
>> you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more
>> familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you
>> would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the problem, or use
>> a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about "data tree"?
>>
>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.
>> To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain
>> varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty
>> meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>
>"these"?

Singular derived from the plural "theses"?

-- 
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in uk.culture.language.english)

> 
> ad 3: array, disposition, formation

Would "formations" be correct?

>

Peter Duncanson wrote:
> On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
>  wrote:
>
>> Mike Stevens wrote:
>>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>>> Hello!
>>>>
>>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>>
>>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>>
>>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize
>>>> document representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be
>>>> wrong to use the
>>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization
>>>> has
>>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>>> properties).
>>>> My question is:
>>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>>> institutional sense only?
>>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>>
>>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a
>>> word in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to
>>> be what you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word
>>> in more familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But,
>>> IMO, you would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the
>>> problem, or use a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about
>>> "data tree"?
>>>
>>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a
>>> plural. To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called
>>> "On certain varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been
>>> pretty meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>>
>> "these"?
>
> Singular derived from the plural "theses"?

Or from the French? (thèse)
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote in message 
news:Kr%4i.4691$F_4.4437@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
> Peter Duncanson wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Stevens wrote:
>>>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>>>> Hello!
>>>>>
>>>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize
>>>>> document representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be
>>>>> wrong to use the
>>>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization
>>>>> has
>>>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>>>> properties).
>>>>> My question is:
>>>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>>>> institutional sense only?
>>>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>>>
>>>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a
>>>> word in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to
>>>> be what you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word
>>>> in more familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But,
>>>> IMO, you would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the
>>>> problem, or use a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about
>>>> "data tree"?
>>>>
>>>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a
>>>> plural. To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called
>>>> "On certain varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been
>>>> pretty meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>>>
>>> "these"?
>>
>> Singular derived from the plural "theses"?
>
> Or from the French? (thèse)

Someone else should write a those on it.

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f31s35$2ln3$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>>
>> ad 3: array, disposition, formation
>
> Would "formations" be correct?
>

I don't see why not. I can imagine a sentence like "The Red Arrows 
demonstrate a variety of formations in their flying display: diamond, delta, 
swallowtail, square and so on." So if your 'organizations' are at all 
analogous to the different ways of arranging nine aircraft in flight, then 
'formations' would surely convey the concept you are trying to put across. I 
would nonetheless prefer 'arrays'.

Another word which comes to mind is 'configurations'. Perhaps if you were to 
post back with a sample sentence or two from your dissertation, someone 
would be able to pinpoint the most appropriate term.

-- 
Noel

Michael Preminger wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the
> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a
> plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able
> to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
> properties).
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
> institutional sense only?

Yes. Organization in the sense, "I need more organization in my life' is 
always in the singular, like 'information' and other words. That sis 'I 
need to organise my life better'.In the institutional sense there is no 
problem for there it means more structures/organizations rather than the 
'attitude' organization.

> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

You don't need any, in the sense "data (or information) organization" 
you'll always be in the 'singular' (collective if you like).

John of Aix wrote:
> Michael Preminger wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>> to use the
>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>> properties).
>> My question is:
>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>> institutional sense only?
>
> Yes. Organization in the sense, "I need more organization in my life'
> is always in the singular, like 'information' and other words. That
> sis 'I need to organise my life better'.In the institutional sense
> there is no problem for there it means more structures/organizations
> rather than the 'attitude' organization.
>
>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>> 3. Any other suggestions
>
> You don't need any, in the sense "data (or information) organization"
> you'll always be in the 'singular' (collective if you like).

Yes, but he was misusing the term in "a data organization" when he meant "a 
data structure" or "a data arrangement" (it is a bit of a puzzle as to why 
"arrangement" shouldn't be open to the same sort of criticism as 
"organization"...)
-- 
John Briggs

Michael Preminger wrote:

> 
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions
> 


Data organization systems ?

-- 
Blue Sow

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).

In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.

There are many other differences in the way the language is used, and in the 
ways that we communicate between ourselves in the UK, so this is the wrong 
place for you to ask such a question.

Seek an appropriate group.

Mark Wallace wrote:
> "Michael Preminger"  wrote in message
> news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.

Not always - but I always do, if only to annoy Americans :-)
-- 
John Briggs

John Briggs schrieb:
> Mark Wallace wrote:
> 
>>"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message
>>news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>>
>>>Hello!
>>>
>>>I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>
>>>In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>>In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.
> 
> 
> Not always - but I always do, if only to annoy Americans :-)

I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and the 
OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a second 
language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are simpler.

Regards, Einde O'Callaghan

In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a second
>language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are simpler.

All you wanted to know, and more, here:

  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206

-- 
Mike Barnes

Michael Preminger wrote:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

"Different schemes of data organisation", "methods of...", "patterns 
of...", or even the dreaded "paradigms of...", would be my choice. I 
take it that "data structures" would be far too specific, and you are 
talking about networks of interlinked data structures.

Paul Burke

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document 
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the noun 
> "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a plural 
> for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able to talk 
> about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their properties).
>
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions
>

ad 3: array, disposition, formation

-- 
Noel

Mike Barnes wrote:
> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>> the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a
>> second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are
>> simpler.
>
> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>
>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206

At least two of those are wrong.
-- 
John Briggs

In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>>> the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a
>>> second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are
>>> simpler.
>>
>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>
>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>
>At least two of those are wrong.

In what respect?

-- 
Mike Barnes

Michael Preminger wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the
> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a
> plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able
> to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
> properties).
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
> institutional sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word in a 
new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what you are 
doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more familiar settings 
and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you would be better to coin a 
new phrase that avoids the problem, or use a word that doesn't present the 
problem.  How about "data tree"?

I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.  To 
algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain 
varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty meaningless 
without the plural "Algebras".


-- 
Mike Stevens
narrowboat Felis Catus III
web-site www.mike-stevens.co.uk

Defend the waterways.
Visit the web site www.saveourwaterways.org.uk

Mike Barnes wrote:
> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>> are simpler.
>>>
>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>
>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>
>> At least two of those are wrong.
>
> In what respect?

"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.

We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.
-- 
John Briggs

Mike Stevens wrote:
> Michael Preminger wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>> to use the
>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>> properties).
>> My question is:
>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>> institutional sense only?
>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>> 3. Any other suggestions
>
> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word
> in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what
> you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more
> familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you
> would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the problem, or use
> a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about "data tree"?
>
> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.
> To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain
> varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty
> meaningless without the plural "Algebras".

"these"?
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote in message 
news:L9F4i.496$qD.294@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
> Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>
>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>
>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>
>> In what respect?
>
> "Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.
>
> We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.

We appear to be in this thread.  Let's nay let the -ize have it!

In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>
>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>
>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>
>> In what respect?
>
>"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.

Where does any of them state that it is?

>We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.

How do you know?

-- 
Mike Barnes

"Mike Barnes"  wrote in message 
news:6OOASEFiozUGFw1y@g52lk5g23lkgk3lk345g.invalid...
> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>>
>>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>>
>>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>>
>>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>>
>>> In what respect?
>>
>>"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.
>
> Where does any of them state that it is?
>
>>We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.
>
> How do you know?

Pick up an English newspaper; they're where bad habits first rear their ugly 
heads.  I see no indication of "~ize" being used more frequently, or with 
different words, than before.

On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
 wrote:

>Mike Stevens wrote:
>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>
>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>
>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>>> to use the
>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>> properties).
>>> My question is:
>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>> institutional sense only?
>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>
>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word
>> in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what
>> you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more
>> familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you
>> would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the problem, or use
>> a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about "data tree"?
>>
>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.
>> To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain
>> varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty
>> meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>
>"these"?

Singular derived from the plural "theses"?

-- 
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in uk.culture.language.english)

> 
> ad 3: array, disposition, formation

Would "formations" be correct?

>

Peter Duncanson wrote:
> On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
>  wrote:
>
>> Mike Stevens wrote:
>>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>>> Hello!
>>>>
>>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>>
>>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>>
>>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize
>>>> document representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be
>>>> wrong to use the
>>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization
>>>> has
>>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>>> properties).
>>>> My question is:
>>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>>> institutional sense only?
>>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>>
>>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a
>>> word in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to
>>> be what you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word
>>> in more familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But,
>>> IMO, you would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the
>>> problem, or use a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about
>>> "data tree"?
>>>
>>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a
>>> plural. To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called
>>> "On certain varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been
>>> pretty meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>>
>> "these"?
>
> Singular derived from the plural "theses"?

Or from the French? (thèse)
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote in message 
news:Kr%4i.4691$F_4.4437@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
> Peter Duncanson wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Stevens wrote:
>>>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>>>> Hello!
>>>>>
>>>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize
>>>>> document representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be
>>>>> wrong to use the
>>>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization
>>>>> has
>>>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>>>> properties).
>>>>> My question is:
>>>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>>>> institutional sense only?
>>>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>>>
>>>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a
>>>> word in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to
>>>> be what you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word
>>>> in more familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But,
>>>> IMO, you would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the
>>>> problem, or use a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about
>>>> "data tree"?
>>>>
>>>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a
>>>> plural. To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called
>>>> "On certain varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been
>>>> pretty meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>>>
>>> "these"?
>>
>> Singular derived from the plural "theses"?
>
> Or from the French? (thèse)

Someone else should write a those on it.

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f31s35$2ln3$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>>
>> ad 3: array, disposition, formation
>
> Would "formations" be correct?
>

I don't see why not. I can imagine a sentence like "The Red Arrows 
demonstrate a variety of formations in their flying display: diamond, delta, 
swallowtail, square and so on." So if your 'organizations' are at all 
analogous to the different ways of arranging nine aircraft in flight, then 
'formations' would surely convey the concept you are trying to put across. I 
would nonetheless prefer 'arrays'.

Another word which comes to mind is 'configurations'. Perhaps if you were to 
post back with a sample sentence or two from your dissertation, someone 
would be able to pinpoint the most appropriate term.

-- 
Noel

Michael Preminger wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the
> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a
> plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able
> to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
> properties).
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
> institutional sense only?

Yes. Organization in the sense, "I need more organization in my life' is 
always in the singular, like 'information' and other words. That sis 'I 
need to organise my life better'.In the institutional sense there is no 
problem for there it means more structures/organizations rather than the 
'attitude' organization.

> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

You don't need any, in the sense "data (or information) organization" 
you'll always be in the 'singular' (collective if you like).

John of Aix wrote:
> Michael Preminger wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>> to use the
>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>> properties).
>> My question is:
>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>> institutional sense only?
>
> Yes. Organization in the sense, "I need more organization in my life'
> is always in the singular, like 'information' and other words. That
> sis 'I need to organise my life better'.In the institutional sense
> there is no problem for there it means more structures/organizations
> rather than the 'attitude' organization.
>
>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>> 3. Any other suggestions
>
> You don't need any, in the sense "data (or information) organization"
> you'll always be in the 'singular' (collective if you like).

Yes, but he was misusing the term in "a data organization" when he meant "a 
data structure" or "a data arrangement" (it is a bit of a puzzle as to why 
"arrangement" shouldn't be open to the same sort of criticism as 
"organization"...)
-- 
John Briggs

Michael Preminger wrote:

> 
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions
> 


Data organization systems ?

-- 
Blue Sow

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).

In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.

There are many other differences in the way the language is used, and in the 
ways that we communicate between ourselves in the UK, so this is the wrong 
place for you to ask such a question.

Seek an appropriate group.

Mark Wallace wrote:
> "Michael Preminger"  wrote in message
> news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.

Not always - but I always do, if only to annoy Americans :-)
-- 
John Briggs

John Briggs schrieb:
> Mark Wallace wrote:
> 
>>"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message
>>news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>>
>>>Hello!
>>>
>>>I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>
>>>In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>>In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.
> 
> 
> Not always - but I always do, if only to annoy Americans :-)

I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and the 
OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a second 
language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are simpler.

Regards, Einde O'Callaghan

In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a second
>language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are simpler.

All you wanted to know, and more, here:

  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206

-- 
Mike Barnes

Michael Preminger wrote:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

"Different schemes of data organisation", "methods of...", "patterns 
of...", or even the dreaded "paradigms of...", would be my choice. I 
take it that "data structures" would be far too specific, and you are 
talking about networks of interlinked data structures.

Paul Burke

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document 
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the noun 
> "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a plural 
> for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able to talk 
> about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their properties).
>
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions
>

ad 3: array, disposition, formation

-- 
Noel

Mike Barnes wrote:
> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>> the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a
>> second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are
>> simpler.
>
> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>
>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206

At least two of those are wrong.
-- 
John Briggs

In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>>> the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a
>>> second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are
>>> simpler.
>>
>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>
>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>
>At least two of those are wrong.

In what respect?

-- 
Mike Barnes

Michael Preminger wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the
> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a
> plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able
> to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
> properties).
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
> institutional sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word in a 
new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what you are 
doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more familiar settings 
and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you would be better to coin a 
new phrase that avoids the problem, or use a word that doesn't present the 
problem.  How about "data tree"?

I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.  To 
algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain 
varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty meaningless 
without the plural "Algebras".


-- 
Mike Stevens
narrowboat Felis Catus III
web-site www.mike-stevens.co.uk

Defend the waterways.
Visit the web site www.saveourwaterways.org.uk

Mike Barnes wrote:
> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>> are simpler.
>>>
>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>
>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>
>> At least two of those are wrong.
>
> In what respect?

"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.

We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.
-- 
John Briggs

Mike Stevens wrote:
> Michael Preminger wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>> to use the
>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>> properties).
>> My question is:
>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>> institutional sense only?
>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>> 3. Any other suggestions
>
> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word
> in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what
> you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more
> familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you
> would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the problem, or use
> a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about "data tree"?
>
> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.
> To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain
> varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty
> meaningless without the plural "Algebras".

"these"?
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote in message 
news:L9F4i.496$qD.294@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
> Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>
>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>
>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>
>> In what respect?
>
> "Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.
>
> We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.

We appear to be in this thread.  Let's nay let the -ize have it!

In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>
>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>
>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>
>> In what respect?
>
>"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.

Where does any of them state that it is?

>We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.

How do you know?

-- 
Mike Barnes

"Mike Barnes"  wrote in message 
news:6OOASEFiozUGFw1y@g52lk5g23lkgk3lk345g.invalid...
> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>>
>>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>>
>>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>>
>>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>>
>>> In what respect?
>>
>>"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.
>
> Where does any of them state that it is?
>
>>We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.
>
> How do you know?

Pick up an English newspaper; they're where bad habits first rear their ugly 
heads.  I see no indication of "~ize" being used more frequently, or with 
different words, than before.

On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
 wrote:

>Mike Stevens wrote:
>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>
>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>
>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>>> to use the
>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>> properties).
>>> My question is:
>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>> institutional sense only?
>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>
>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word
>> in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what
>> you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more
>> familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you
>> would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the problem, or use
>> a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about "data tree"?
>>
>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.
>> To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain
>> varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty
>> meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>
>"these"?

Singular derived from the plural "theses"?

-- 
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in uk.culture.language.english)

> 
> ad 3: array, disposition, formation

Would "formations" be correct?

>

Peter Duncanson wrote:
> On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
>  wrote:
>
>> Mike Stevens wrote:
>>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>>> Hello!
>>>>
>>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>>
>>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>>
>>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize
>>>> document representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be
>>>> wrong to use the
>>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization
>>>> has
>>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>>> properties).
>>>> My question is:
>>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>>> institutional sense only?
>>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>>
>>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a
>>> word in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to
>>> be what you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word
>>> in more familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But,
>>> IMO, you would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the
>>> problem, or use a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about
>>> "data tree"?
>>>
>>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a
>>> plural. To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called
>>> "On certain varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been
>>> pretty meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>>
>> "these"?
>
> Singular derived from the plural "theses"?

Or from the French? (thèse)
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote in message 
news:Kr%4i.4691$F_4.4437@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
> Peter Duncanson wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Stevens wrote:
>>>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>>>> Hello!
>>>>>
>>>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize
>>>>> document representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be
>>>>> wrong to use the
>>>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization
>>>>> has
>>>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>>>> properties).
>>>>> My question is:
>>>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>>>> institutional sense only?
>>>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>>>
>>>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a
>>>> word in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to
>>>> be what you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word
>>>> in more familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But,
>>>> IMO, you would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the
>>>> problem, or use a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about
>>>> "data tree"?
>>>>
>>>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a
>>>> plural. To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called
>>>> "On certain varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been
>>>> pretty meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>>>
>>> "these"?
>>
>> Singular derived from the plural "theses"?
>
> Or from the French? (thèse)

Someone else should write a those on it.

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f31s35$2ln3$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>>
>> ad 3: array, disposition, formation
>
> Would "formations" be correct?
>

I don't see why not. I can imagine a sentence like "The Red Arrows 
demonstrate a variety of formations in their flying display: diamond, delta, 
swallowtail, square and so on." So if your 'organizations' are at all 
analogous to the different ways of arranging nine aircraft in flight, then 
'formations' would surely convey the concept you are trying to put across. I 
would nonetheless prefer 'arrays'.

Another word which comes to mind is 'configurations'. Perhaps if you were to 
post back with a sample sentence or two from your dissertation, someone 
would be able to pinpoint the most appropriate term.

-- 
Noel

Michael Preminger wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the
> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a
> plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able
> to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
> properties).
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
> institutional sense only?

Yes. Organization in the sense, "I need more organization in my life' is 
always in the singular, like 'information' and other words. That sis 'I 
need to organise my life better'.In the institutional sense there is no 
problem for there it means more structures/organizations rather than the 
'attitude' organization.

> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

You don't need any, in the sense "data (or information) organization" 
you'll always be in the 'singular' (collective if you like).

John of Aix wrote:
> Michael Preminger wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>> to use the
>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>> properties).
>> My question is:
>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>> institutional sense only?
>
> Yes. Organization in the sense, "I need more organization in my life'
> is always in the singular, like 'information' and other words. That
> sis 'I need to organise my life better'.In the institutional sense
> there is no problem for there it means more structures/organizations
> rather than the 'attitude' organization.
>
>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>> 3. Any other suggestions
>
> You don't need any, in the sense "data (or information) organization"
> you'll always be in the 'singular' (collective if you like).

Yes, but he was misusing the term in "a data organization" when he meant "a 
data structure" or "a data arrangement" (it is a bit of a puzzle as to why 
"arrangement" shouldn't be open to the same sort of criticism as 
"organization"...)
-- 
John Briggs

Michael Preminger wrote:

> 
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions
> 


Data organization systems ?

-- 
Blue Sow

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).

In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.

There are many other differences in the way the language is used, and in the 
ways that we communicate between ourselves in the UK, so this is the wrong 
place for you to ask such a question.

Seek an appropriate group.

Mark Wallace wrote:
> "Michael Preminger"  wrote in message
> news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.

Not always - but I always do, if only to annoy Americans :-)
-- 
John Briggs

John Briggs schrieb:
> Mark Wallace wrote:
> 
>>"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message
>>news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>>
>>>Hello!
>>>
>>>I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>
>>>In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>>In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.
> 
> 
> Not always - but I always do, if only to annoy Americans :-)

I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and the 
OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a second 
language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are simpler.

Regards, Einde O'Callaghan

In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a second
>language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are simpler.

All you wanted to know, and more, here:

  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206

-- 
Mike Barnes

Michael Preminger wrote:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

"Different schemes of data organisation", "methods of...", "patterns 
of...", or even the dreaded "paradigms of...", would be my choice. I 
take it that "data structures" would be far too specific, and you are 
talking about networks of interlinked data structures.

Paul Burke

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document 
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the noun 
> "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a plural 
> for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able to talk 
> about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their properties).
>
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions
>

ad 3: array, disposition, formation

-- 
Noel

Mike Barnes wrote:
> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>> the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a
>> second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are
>> simpler.
>
> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>
>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206

At least two of those are wrong.
-- 
John Briggs

In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>>> the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a
>>> second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are
>>> simpler.
>>
>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>
>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>
>At least two of those are wrong.

In what respect?

-- 
Mike Barnes

Michael Preminger wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the
> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a
> plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able
> to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
> properties).
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
> institutional sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word in a 
new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what you are 
doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more familiar settings 
and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you would be better to coin a 
new phrase that avoids the problem, or use a word that doesn't present the 
problem.  How about "data tree"?

I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.  To 
algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain 
varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty meaningless 
without the plural "Algebras".


-- 
Mike Stevens
narrowboat Felis Catus III
web-site www.mike-stevens.co.uk

Defend the waterways.
Visit the web site www.saveourwaterways.org.uk

Mike Barnes wrote:
> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>> are simpler.
>>>
>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>
>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>
>> At least two of those are wrong.
>
> In what respect?

"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.

We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.
-- 
John Briggs

Mike Stevens wrote:
> Michael Preminger wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>> to use the
>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>> properties).
>> My question is:
>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>> institutional sense only?
>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>> 3. Any other suggestions
>
> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word
> in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what
> you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more
> familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you
> would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the problem, or use
> a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about "data tree"?
>
> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.
> To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain
> varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty
> meaningless without the plural "Algebras".

"these"?
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote in message 
news:L9F4i.496$qD.294@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
> Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>
>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>
>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>
>> In what respect?
>
> "Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.
>
> We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.

We appear to be in this thread.  Let's nay let the -ize have it!

In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>
>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>
>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>
>> In what respect?
>
>"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.

Where does any of them state that it is?

>We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.

How do you know?

-- 
Mike Barnes

"Mike Barnes"  wrote in message 
news:6OOASEFiozUGFw1y@g52lk5g23lkgk3lk345g.invalid...
> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>>
>>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>>
>>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>>
>>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>>
>>> In what respect?
>>
>>"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.
>
> Where does any of them state that it is?
>
>>We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.
>
> How do you know?

Pick up an English newspaper; they're where bad habits first rear their ugly 
heads.  I see no indication of "~ize" being used more frequently, or with 
different words, than before.

On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
 wrote:

>Mike Stevens wrote:
>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>
>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>
>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>>> to use the
>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>> properties).
>>> My question is:
>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>> institutional sense only?
>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>
>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word
>> in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what
>> you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more
>> familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you
>> would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the problem, or use
>> a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about "data tree"?
>>
>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.
>> To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain
>> varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty
>> meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>
>"these"?

Singular derived from the plural "theses"?

-- 
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in uk.culture.language.english)

> 
> ad 3: array, disposition, formation

Would "formations" be correct?

>

Peter Duncanson wrote:
> On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
>  wrote:
>
>> Mike Stevens wrote:
>>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>>> Hello!
>>>>
>>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>>
>>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>>
>>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize
>>>> document representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be
>>>> wrong to use the
>>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization
>>>> has
>>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>>> properties).
>>>> My question is:
>>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>>> institutional sense only?
>>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>>
>>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a
>>> word in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to
>>> be what you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word
>>> in more familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But,
>>> IMO, you would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the
>>> problem, or use a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about
>>> "data tree"?
>>>
>>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a
>>> plural. To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called
>>> "On certain varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been
>>> pretty meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>>
>> "these"?
>
> Singular derived from the plural "theses"?

Or from the French? (thèse)
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote in message 
news:Kr%4i.4691$F_4.4437@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
> Peter Duncanson wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Stevens wrote:
>>>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>>>> Hello!
>>>>>
>>>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize
>>>>> document representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be
>>>>> wrong to use the
>>>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization
>>>>> has
>>>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>>>> properties).
>>>>> My question is:
>>>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>>>> institutional sense only?
>>>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>>>
>>>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a
>>>> word in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to
>>>> be what you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word
>>>> in more familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But,
>>>> IMO, you would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the
>>>> problem, or use a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about
>>>> "data tree"?
>>>>
>>>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a
>>>> plural. To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called
>>>> "On certain varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been
>>>> pretty meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>>>
>>> "these"?
>>
>> Singular derived from the plural "theses"?
>
> Or from the French? (thèse)

Someone else should write a those on it.

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f31s35$2ln3$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>>
>> ad 3: array, disposition, formation
>
> Would "formations" be correct?
>

I don't see why not. I can imagine a sentence like "The Red Arrows 
demonstrate a variety of formations in their flying display: diamond, delta, 
swallowtail, square and so on." So if your 'organizations' are at all 
analogous to the different ways of arranging nine aircraft in flight, then 
'formations' would surely convey the concept you are trying to put across. I 
would nonetheless prefer 'arrays'.

Another word which comes to mind is 'configurations'. Perhaps if you were to 
post back with a sample sentence or two from your dissertation, someone 
would be able to pinpoint the most appropriate term.

-- 
Noel

Michael Preminger wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the
> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a
> plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able
> to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
> properties).
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
> institutional sense only?

Yes. Organization in the sense, "I need more organization in my life' is 
always in the singular, like 'information' and other words. That sis 'I 
need to organise my life better'.In the institutional sense there is no 
problem for there it means more structures/organizations rather than the 
'attitude' organization.

> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

You don't need any, in the sense "data (or information) organization" 
you'll always be in the 'singular' (collective if you like).

John of Aix wrote:
> Michael Preminger wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>> to use the
>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>> properties).
>> My question is:
>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>> institutional sense only?
>
> Yes. Organization in the sense, "I need more organization in my life'
> is always in the singular, like 'information' and other words. That
> sis 'I need to organise my life better'.In the institutional sense
> there is no problem for there it means more structures/organizations
> rather than the 'attitude' organization.
>
>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>> 3. Any other suggestions
>
> You don't need any, in the sense "data (or information) organization"
> you'll always be in the 'singular' (collective if you like).

Yes, but he was misusing the term in "a data organization" when he meant "a 
data structure" or "a data arrangement" (it is a bit of a puzzle as to why 
"arrangement" shouldn't be open to the same sort of criticism as 
"organization"...)
-- 
John Briggs

Michael Preminger wrote:

> 
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions
> 


Data organization systems ?

-- 
Blue Sow

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).

In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.

There are many other differences in the way the language is used, and in the 
ways that we communicate between ourselves in the UK, so this is the wrong 
place for you to ask such a question.

Seek an appropriate group.

Mark Wallace wrote:
> "Michael Preminger"  wrote in message
> news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.

Not always - but I always do, if only to annoy Americans :-)
-- 
John Briggs

John Briggs schrieb:
> Mark Wallace wrote:
> 
>>"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message
>>news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>>
>>>Hello!
>>>
>>>I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>
>>>In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>>In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.
> 
> 
> Not always - but I always do, if only to annoy Americans :-)

I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and the 
OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a second 
language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are simpler.

Regards, Einde O'Callaghan

In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a second
>language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are simpler.

All you wanted to know, and more, here:

  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206

-- 
Mike Barnes

Michael Preminger wrote:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

"Different schemes of data organisation", "methods of...", "patterns 
of...", or even the dreaded "paradigms of...", would be my choice. I 
take it that "data structures" would be far too specific, and you are 
talking about networks of interlinked data structures.

Paul Burke

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document 
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the noun 
> "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a plural 
> for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able to talk 
> about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their properties).
>
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions
>

ad 3: array, disposition, formation

-- 
Noel

Mike Barnes wrote:
> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>> the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a
>> second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are
>> simpler.
>
> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>
>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206

At least two of those are wrong.
-- 
John Briggs

In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>>> the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a
>>> second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are
>>> simpler.
>>
>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>
>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>
>At least two of those are wrong.

In what respect?

-- 
Mike Barnes

Michael Preminger wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the
> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a
> plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able
> to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
> properties).
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
> institutional sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word in a 
new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what you are 
doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more familiar settings 
and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you would be better to coin a 
new phrase that avoids the problem, or use a word that doesn't present the 
problem.  How about "data tree"?

I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.  To 
algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain 
varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty meaningless 
without the plural "Algebras".


-- 
Mike Stevens
narrowboat Felis Catus III
web-site www.mike-stevens.co.uk

Defend the waterways.
Visit the web site www.saveourwaterways.org.uk

Mike Barnes wrote:
> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>> are simpler.
>>>
>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>
>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>
>> At least two of those are wrong.
>
> In what respect?

"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.

We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.
-- 
John Briggs

Mike Stevens wrote:
> Michael Preminger wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>> to use the
>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>> properties).
>> My question is:
>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>> institutional sense only?
>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>> 3. Any other suggestions
>
> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word
> in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what
> you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more
> familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you
> would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the problem, or use
> a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about "data tree"?
>
> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.
> To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain
> varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty
> meaningless without the plural "Algebras".

"these"?
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote in message 
news:L9F4i.496$qD.294@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
> Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>
>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>
>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>
>> In what respect?
>
> "Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.
>
> We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.

We appear to be in this thread.  Let's nay let the -ize have it!

In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>
>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>
>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>
>> In what respect?
>
>"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.

Where does any of them state that it is?

>We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.

How do you know?

-- 
Mike Barnes

"Mike Barnes"  wrote in message 
news:6OOASEFiozUGFw1y@g52lk5g23lkgk3lk345g.invalid...
> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>>
>>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>>
>>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>>
>>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>>
>>> In what respect?
>>
>>"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.
>
> Where does any of them state that it is?
>
>>We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.
>
> How do you know?

Pick up an English newspaper; they're where bad habits first rear their ugly 
heads.  I see no indication of "~ize" being used more frequently, or with 
different words, than before.

On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
 wrote:

>Mike Stevens wrote:
>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>
>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>
>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>>> to use the
>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>> properties).
>>> My question is:
>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>> institutional sense only?
>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>
>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word
>> in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what
>> you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more
>> familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you
>> would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the problem, or use
>> a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about "data tree"?
>>
>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.
>> To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain
>> varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty
>> meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>
>"these"?

Singular derived from the plural "theses"?

-- 
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in uk.culture.language.english)

> 
> ad 3: array, disposition, formation

Would "formations" be correct?

>

Peter Duncanson wrote:
> On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
>  wrote:
>
>> Mike Stevens wrote:
>>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>>> Hello!
>>>>
>>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>>
>>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>>
>>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize
>>>> document representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be
>>>> wrong to use the
>>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization
>>>> has
>>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>>> properties).
>>>> My question is:
>>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>>> institutional sense only?
>>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>>
>>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a
>>> word in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to
>>> be what you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word
>>> in more familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But,
>>> IMO, you would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the
>>> problem, or use a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about
>>> "data tree"?
>>>
>>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a
>>> plural. To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called
>>> "On certain varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been
>>> pretty meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>>
>> "these"?
>
> Singular derived from the plural "theses"?

Or from the French? (thèse)
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote in message 
news:Kr%4i.4691$F_4.4437@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
> Peter Duncanson wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Stevens wrote:
>>>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>>>> Hello!
>>>>>
>>>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize
>>>>> document representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be
>>>>> wrong to use the
>>>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization
>>>>> has
>>>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>>>> properties).
>>>>> My question is:
>>>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>>>> institutional sense only?
>>>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>>>
>>>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a
>>>> word in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to
>>>> be what you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word
>>>> in more familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But,
>>>> IMO, you would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the
>>>> problem, or use a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about
>>>> "data tree"?
>>>>
>>>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a
>>>> plural. To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called
>>>> "On certain varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been
>>>> pretty meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>>>
>>> "these"?
>>
>> Singular derived from the plural "theses"?
>
> Or from the French? (thèse)

Someone else should write a those on it.

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f31s35$2ln3$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>>
>> ad 3: array, disposition, formation
>
> Would "formations" be correct?
>

I don't see why not. I can imagine a sentence like "The Red Arrows 
demonstrate a variety of formations in their flying display: diamond, delta, 
swallowtail, square and so on." So if your 'organizations' are at all 
analogous to the different ways of arranging nine aircraft in flight, then 
'formations' would surely convey the concept you are trying to put across. I 
would nonetheless prefer 'arrays'.

Another word which comes to mind is 'configurations'. Perhaps if you were to 
post back with a sample sentence or two from your dissertation, someone 
would be able to pinpoint the most appropriate term.

-- 
Noel

Michael Preminger wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the
> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a
> plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able
> to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
> properties).
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
> institutional sense only?

Yes. Organization in the sense, "I need more organization in my life' is 
always in the singular, like 'information' and other words. That sis 'I 
need to organise my life better'.In the institutional sense there is no 
problem for there it means more structures/organizations rather than the 
'attitude' organization.

> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

You don't need any, in the sense "data (or information) organization" 
you'll always be in the 'singular' (collective if you like).

John of Aix wrote:
> Michael Preminger wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>> to use the
>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>> properties).
>> My question is:
>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>> institutional sense only?
>
> Yes. Organization in the sense, "I need more organization in my life'
> is always in the singular, like 'information' and other words. That
> sis 'I need to organise my life better'.In the institutional sense
> there is no problem for there it means more structures/organizations
> rather than the 'attitude' organization.
>
>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>> 3. Any other suggestions
>
> You don't need any, in the sense "data (or information) organization"
> you'll always be in the 'singular' (collective if you like).

Yes, but he was misusing the term in "a data organization" when he meant "a 
data structure" or "a data arrangement" (it is a bit of a puzzle as to why 
"arrangement" shouldn't be open to the same sort of criticism as 
"organization"...)
-- 
John Briggs

Michael Preminger wrote:

> 
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions
> 


Data organization systems ?

-- 
Blue Sow

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).

In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.

There are many other differences in the way the language is used, and in the 
ways that we communicate between ourselves in the UK, so this is the wrong 
place for you to ask such a question.

Seek an appropriate group.

Mark Wallace wrote:
> "Michael Preminger"  wrote in message
> news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.

Not always - but I always do, if only to annoy Americans :-)
-- 
John Briggs

John Briggs schrieb:
> Mark Wallace wrote:
> 
>>"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message
>>news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>>
>>>Hello!
>>>
>>>I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>
>>>In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>>In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.
> 
> 
> Not always - but I always do, if only to annoy Americans :-)

I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and the 
OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a second 
language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are simpler.

Regards, Einde O'Callaghan

In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a second
>language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are simpler.

All you wanted to know, and more, here:

  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206

-- 
Mike Barnes

Michael Preminger wrote:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

"Different schemes of data organisation", "methods of...", "patterns 
of...", or even the dreaded "paradigms of...", would be my choice. I 
take it that "data structures" would be far too specific, and you are 
talking about networks of interlinked data structures.

Paul Burke

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document 
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the noun 
> "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a plural 
> for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able to talk 
> about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their properties).
>
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions
>

ad 3: array, disposition, formation

-- 
Noel

Mike Barnes wrote:
> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>> the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a
>> second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are
>> simpler.
>
> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>
>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206

At least two of those are wrong.
-- 
John Briggs

In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>>> the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a
>>> second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are
>>> simpler.
>>
>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>
>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>
>At least two of those are wrong.

In what respect?

-- 
Mike Barnes

Michael Preminger wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the
> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a
> plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able
> to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
> properties).
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
> institutional sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word in a 
new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what you are 
doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more familiar settings 
and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you would be better to coin a 
new phrase that avoids the problem, or use a word that doesn't present the 
problem.  How about "data tree"?

I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.  To 
algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain 
varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty meaningless 
without the plural "Algebras".


-- 
Mike Stevens
narrowboat Felis Catus III
web-site www.mike-stevens.co.uk

Defend the waterways.
Visit the web site www.saveourwaterways.org.uk

Mike Barnes wrote:
> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>> are simpler.
>>>
>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>
>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>
>> At least two of those are wrong.
>
> In what respect?

"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.

We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.
-- 
John Briggs

Mike Stevens wrote:
> Michael Preminger wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>> to use the
>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>> properties).
>> My question is:
>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>> institutional sense only?
>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>> 3. Any other suggestions
>
> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word
> in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what
> you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more
> familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you
> would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the problem, or use
> a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about "data tree"?
>
> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.
> To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain
> varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty
> meaningless without the plural "Algebras".

"these"?
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote in message 
news:L9F4i.496$qD.294@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
> Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>
>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>
>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>
>> In what respect?
>
> "Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.
>
> We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.

We appear to be in this thread.  Let's nay let the -ize have it!

In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>
>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>
>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>
>> In what respect?
>
>"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.

Where does any of them state that it is?

>We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.

How do you know?

-- 
Mike Barnes

"Mike Barnes"  wrote in message 
news:6OOASEFiozUGFw1y@g52lk5g23lkgk3lk345g.invalid...
> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>>
>>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>>
>>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>>
>>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>>
>>> In what respect?
>>
>>"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.
>
> Where does any of them state that it is?
>
>>We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.
>
> How do you know?

Pick up an English newspaper; they're where bad habits first rear their ugly 
heads.  I see no indication of "~ize" being used more frequently, or with 
different words, than before.

On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
 wrote:

>Mike Stevens wrote:
>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>
>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>
>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>>> to use the
>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>> properties).
>>> My question is:
>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>> institutional sense only?
>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>
>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word
>> in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what
>> you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more
>> familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you
>> would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the problem, or use
>> a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about "data tree"?
>>
>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.
>> To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain
>> varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty
>> meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>
>"these"?

Singular derived from the plural "theses"?

-- 
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in uk.culture.language.english)

> 
> ad 3: array, disposition, formation

Would "formations" be correct?

>

Peter Duncanson wrote:
> On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
>  wrote:
>
>> Mike Stevens wrote:
>>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>>> Hello!
>>>>
>>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>>
>>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>>
>>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize
>>>> document representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be
>>>> wrong to use the
>>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization
>>>> has
>>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>>> properties).
>>>> My question is:
>>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>>> institutional sense only?
>>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>>
>>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a
>>> word in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to
>>> be what you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word
>>> in more familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But,
>>> IMO, you would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the
>>> problem, or use a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about
>>> "data tree"?
>>>
>>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a
>>> plural. To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called
>>> "On certain varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been
>>> pretty meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>>
>> "these"?
>
> Singular derived from the plural "theses"?

Or from the French? (thèse)
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote in message 
news:Kr%4i.4691$F_4.4437@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
> Peter Duncanson wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Stevens wrote:
>>>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>>>> Hello!
>>>>>
>>>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize
>>>>> document representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be
>>>>> wrong to use the
>>>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization
>>>>> has
>>>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>>>> properties).
>>>>> My question is:
>>>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>>>> institutional sense only?
>>>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>>>
>>>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a
>>>> word in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to
>>>> be what you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word
>>>> in more familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But,
>>>> IMO, you would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the
>>>> problem, or use a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about
>>>> "data tree"?
>>>>
>>>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a
>>>> plural. To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called
>>>> "On certain varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been
>>>> pretty meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>>>
>>> "these"?
>>
>> Singular derived from the plural "theses"?
>
> Or from the French? (thèse)

Someone else should write a those on it.

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f31s35$2ln3$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>>
>> ad 3: array, disposition, formation
>
> Would "formations" be correct?
>

I don't see why not. I can imagine a sentence like "The Red Arrows 
demonstrate a variety of formations in their flying display: diamond, delta, 
swallowtail, square and so on." So if your 'organizations' are at all 
analogous to the different ways of arranging nine aircraft in flight, then 
'formations' would surely convey the concept you are trying to put across. I 
would nonetheless prefer 'arrays'.

Another word which comes to mind is 'configurations'. Perhaps if you were to 
post back with a sample sentence or two from your dissertation, someone 
would be able to pinpoint the most appropriate term.

-- 
Noel

Michael Preminger wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the
> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a
> plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able
> to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
> properties).
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
> institutional sense only?

Yes. Organization in the sense, "I need more organization in my life' is 
always in the singular, like 'information' and other words. That sis 'I 
need to organise my life better'.In the institutional sense there is no 
problem for there it means more structures/organizations rather than the 
'attitude' organization.

> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

You don't need any, in the sense "data (or information) organization" 
you'll always be in the 'singular' (collective if you like).

John of Aix wrote:
> Michael Preminger wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>> to use the
>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>> properties).
>> My question is:
>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>> institutional sense only?
>
> Yes. Organization in the sense, "I need more organization in my life'
> is always in the singular, like 'information' and other words. That
> sis 'I need to organise my life better'.In the institutional sense
> there is no problem for there it means more structures/organizations
> rather than the 'attitude' organization.
>
>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>> 3. Any other suggestions
>
> You don't need any, in the sense "data (or information) organization"
> you'll always be in the 'singular' (collective if you like).

Yes, but he was misusing the term in "a data organization" when he meant "a 
data structure" or "a data arrangement" (it is a bit of a puzzle as to why 
"arrangement" shouldn't be open to the same sort of criticism as 
"organization"...)
-- 
John Briggs

Michael Preminger wrote:

> 
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions
> 


Data organization systems ?

-- 
Blue Sow

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).

In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.

There are many other differences in the way the language is used, and in the 
ways that we communicate between ourselves in the UK, so this is the wrong 
place for you to ask such a question.

Seek an appropriate group.

Mark Wallace wrote:
> "Michael Preminger"  wrote in message
> news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.

Not always - but I always do, if only to annoy Americans :-)
-- 
John Briggs

John Briggs schrieb:
> Mark Wallace wrote:
> 
>>"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message
>>news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>>
>>>Hello!
>>>
>>>I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>
>>>In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>>In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.
> 
> 
> Not always - but I always do, if only to annoy Americans :-)

I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and the 
OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a second 
language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are simpler.

Regards, Einde O'Callaghan

In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a second
>language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are simpler.

All you wanted to know, and more, here:

  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206

-- 
Mike Barnes

Michael Preminger wrote:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

"Different schemes of data organisation", "methods of...", "patterns 
of...", or even the dreaded "paradigms of...", would be my choice. I 
take it that "data structures" would be far too specific, and you are 
talking about networks of interlinked data structures.

Paul Burke

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document 
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the noun 
> "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a plural 
> for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able to talk 
> about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their properties).
>
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions
>

ad 3: array, disposition, formation

-- 
Noel

Mike Barnes wrote:
> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>> the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a
>> second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are
>> simpler.
>
> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>
>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206

At least two of those are wrong.
-- 
John Briggs

In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>>> the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a
>>> second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are
>>> simpler.
>>
>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>
>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>
>At least two of those are wrong.

In what respect?

-- 
Mike Barnes

Michael Preminger wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the
> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a
> plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able
> to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
> properties).
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
> institutional sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word in a 
new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what you are 
doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more familiar settings 
and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you would be better to coin a 
new phrase that avoids the problem, or use a word that doesn't present the 
problem.  How about "data tree"?

I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.  To 
algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain 
varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty meaningless 
without the plural "Algebras".


-- 
Mike Stevens
narrowboat Felis Catus III
web-site www.mike-stevens.co.uk

Defend the waterways.
Visit the web site www.saveourwaterways.org.uk

Mike Barnes wrote:
> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>> are simpler.
>>>
>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>
>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>
>> At least two of those are wrong.
>
> In what respect?

"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.

We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.
-- 
John Briggs

Mike Stevens wrote:
> Michael Preminger wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>> to use the
>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>> properties).
>> My question is:
>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>> institutional sense only?
>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>> 3. Any other suggestions
>
> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word
> in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what
> you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more
> familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you
> would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the problem, or use
> a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about "data tree"?
>
> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.
> To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain
> varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty
> meaningless without the plural "Algebras".

"these"?
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote in message 
news:L9F4i.496$qD.294@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
> Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>
>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>
>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>
>> In what respect?
>
> "Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.
>
> We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.

We appear to be in this thread.  Let's nay let the -ize have it!

In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>
>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>
>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>
>> In what respect?
>
>"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.

Where does any of them state that it is?

>We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.

How do you know?

-- 
Mike Barnes

"Mike Barnes"  wrote in message 
news:6OOASEFiozUGFw1y@g52lk5g23lkgk3lk345g.invalid...
> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>>
>>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>>
>>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>>
>>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>>
>>> In what respect?
>>
>>"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.
>
> Where does any of them state that it is?
>
>>We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.
>
> How do you know?

Pick up an English newspaper; they're where bad habits first rear their ugly 
heads.  I see no indication of "~ize" being used more frequently, or with 
different words, than before.

On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
 wrote:

>Mike Stevens wrote:
>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>
>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>
>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>>> to use the
>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>> properties).
>>> My question is:
>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>> institutional sense only?
>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>
>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word
>> in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what
>> you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more
>> familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you
>> would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the problem, or use
>> a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about "data tree"?
>>
>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.
>> To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain
>> varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty
>> meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>
>"these"?

Singular derived from the plural "theses"?

-- 
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in uk.culture.language.english)

> 
> ad 3: array, disposition, formation

Would "formations" be correct?

>

Peter Duncanson wrote:
> On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
>  wrote:
>
>> Mike Stevens wrote:
>>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>>> Hello!
>>>>
>>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>>
>>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>>
>>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize
>>>> document representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be
>>>> wrong to use the
>>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization
>>>> has
>>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>>> properties).
>>>> My question is:
>>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>>> institutional sense only?
>>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>>
>>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a
>>> word in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to
>>> be what you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word
>>> in more familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But,
>>> IMO, you would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the
>>> problem, or use a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about
>>> "data tree"?
>>>
>>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a
>>> plural. To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called
>>> "On certain varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been
>>> pretty meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>>
>> "these"?
>
> Singular derived from the plural "theses"?

Or from the French? (thèse)
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote in message 
news:Kr%4i.4691$F_4.4437@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
> Peter Duncanson wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Stevens wrote:
>>>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>>>> Hello!
>>>>>
>>>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize
>>>>> document representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be
>>>>> wrong to use the
>>>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization
>>>>> has
>>>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>>>> properties).
>>>>> My question is:
>>>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>>>> institutional sense only?
>>>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>>>
>>>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a
>>>> word in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to
>>>> be what you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word
>>>> in more familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But,
>>>> IMO, you would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the
>>>> problem, or use a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about
>>>> "data tree"?
>>>>
>>>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a
>>>> plural. To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called
>>>> "On certain varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been
>>>> pretty meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>>>
>>> "these"?
>>
>> Singular derived from the plural "theses"?
>
> Or from the French? (thèse)

Someone else should write a those on it.

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f31s35$2ln3$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>>
>> ad 3: array, disposition, formation
>
> Would "formations" be correct?
>

I don't see why not. I can imagine a sentence like "The Red Arrows 
demonstrate a variety of formations in their flying display: diamond, delta, 
swallowtail, square and so on." So if your 'organizations' are at all 
analogous to the different ways of arranging nine aircraft in flight, then 
'formations' would surely convey the concept you are trying to put across. I 
would nonetheless prefer 'arrays'.

Another word which comes to mind is 'configurations'. Perhaps if you were to 
post back with a sample sentence or two from your dissertation, someone 
would be able to pinpoint the most appropriate term.

-- 
Noel

Michael Preminger wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the
> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a
> plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able
> to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
> properties).
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
> institutional sense only?

Yes. Organization in the sense, "I need more organization in my life' is 
always in the singular, like 'information' and other words. That sis 'I 
need to organise my life better'.In the institutional sense there is no 
problem for there it means more structures/organizations rather than the 
'attitude' organization.

> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

You don't need any, in the sense "data (or information) organization" 
you'll always be in the 'singular' (collective if you like).

John of Aix wrote:
> Michael Preminger wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>> to use the
>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>> properties).
>> My question is:
>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>> institutional sense only?
>
> Yes. Organization in the sense, "I need more organization in my life'
> is always in the singular, like 'information' and other words. That
> sis 'I need to organise my life better'.In the institutional sense
> there is no problem for there it means more structures/organizations
> rather than the 'attitude' organization.
>
>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>> 3. Any other suggestions
>
> You don't need any, in the sense "data (or information) organization"
> you'll always be in the 'singular' (collective if you like).

Yes, but he was misusing the term in "a data organization" when he meant "a 
data structure" or "a data arrangement" (it is a bit of a puzzle as to why 
"arrangement" shouldn't be open to the same sort of criticism as 
"organization"...)
-- 
John Briggs

Michael Preminger wrote:

> 
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions
> 


Data organization systems ?

-- 
Blue Sow

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).

In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.

There are many other differences in the way the language is used, and in the 
ways that we communicate between ourselves in the UK, so this is the wrong 
place for you to ask such a question.

Seek an appropriate group.

Mark Wallace wrote:
> "Michael Preminger"  wrote in message
> news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.

Not always - but I always do, if only to annoy Americans :-)
-- 
John Briggs

John Briggs schrieb:
> Mark Wallace wrote:
> 
>>"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message
>>news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>>
>>>Hello!
>>>
>>>I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>
>>>In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>>In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.
> 
> 
> Not always - but I always do, if only to annoy Americans :-)

I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and the 
OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a second 
language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are simpler.

Regards, Einde O'Callaghan

In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a second
>language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are simpler.

All you wanted to know, and more, here:

  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206

-- 
Mike Barnes

Michael Preminger wrote:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

"Different schemes of data organisation", "methods of...", "patterns 
of...", or even the dreaded "paradigms of...", would be my choice. I 
take it that "data structures" would be far too specific, and you are 
talking about networks of interlinked data structures.

Paul Burke

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document 
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the noun 
> "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a plural 
> for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able to talk 
> about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their properties).
>
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions
>

ad 3: array, disposition, formation

-- 
Noel

Mike Barnes wrote:
> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>> the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a
>> second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are
>> simpler.
>
> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>
>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206

At least two of those are wrong.
-- 
John Briggs

In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>>> the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a
>>> second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are
>>> simpler.
>>
>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>
>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>
>At least two of those are wrong.

In what respect?

-- 
Mike Barnes

Michael Preminger wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the
> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a
> plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able
> to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
> properties).
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
> institutional sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word in a 
new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what you are 
doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more familiar settings 
and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you would be better to coin a 
new phrase that avoids the problem, or use a word that doesn't present the 
problem.  How about "data tree"?

I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.  To 
algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain 
varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty meaningless 
without the plural "Algebras".


-- 
Mike Stevens
narrowboat Felis Catus III
web-site www.mike-stevens.co.uk

Defend the waterways.
Visit the web site www.saveourwaterways.org.uk

Mike Barnes wrote:
> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>> are simpler.
>>>
>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>
>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>
>> At least two of those are wrong.
>
> In what respect?

"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.

We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.
-- 
John Briggs

Mike Stevens wrote:
> Michael Preminger wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>> to use the
>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>> properties).
>> My question is:
>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>> institutional sense only?
>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>> 3. Any other suggestions
>
> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word
> in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what
> you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more
> familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you
> would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the problem, or use
> a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about "data tree"?
>
> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.
> To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain
> varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty
> meaningless without the plural "Algebras".

"these"?
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote in message 
news:L9F4i.496$qD.294@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
> Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>
>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>
>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>
>> In what respect?
>
> "Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.
>
> We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.

We appear to be in this thread.  Let's nay let the -ize have it!

In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>
>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>
>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>
>> In what respect?
>
>"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.

Where does any of them state that it is?

>We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.

How do you know?

-- 
Mike Barnes

"Mike Barnes"  wrote in message 
news:6OOASEFiozUGFw1y@g52lk5g23lkgk3lk345g.invalid...
> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>>
>>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>>
>>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>>
>>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>>
>>> In what respect?
>>
>>"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.
>
> Where does any of them state that it is?
>
>>We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.
>
> How do you know?

Pick up an English newspaper; they're where bad habits first rear their ugly 
heads.  I see no indication of "~ize" being used more frequently, or with 
different words, than before.

On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
 wrote:

>Mike Stevens wrote:
>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>
>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>
>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>>> to use the
>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>> properties).
>>> My question is:
>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>> institutional sense only?
>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>
>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word
>> in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what
>> you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more
>> familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you
>> would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the problem, or use
>> a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about "data tree"?
>>
>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.
>> To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain
>> varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty
>> meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>
>"these"?

Singular derived from the plural "theses"?

-- 
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in uk.culture.language.english)

> 
> ad 3: array, disposition, formation

Would "formations" be correct?

>

Peter Duncanson wrote:
> On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
>  wrote:
>
>> Mike Stevens wrote:
>>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>>> Hello!
>>>>
>>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>>
>>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>>
>>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize
>>>> document representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be
>>>> wrong to use the
>>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization
>>>> has
>>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>>> properties).
>>>> My question is:
>>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>>> institutional sense only?
>>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>>
>>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a
>>> word in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to
>>> be what you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word
>>> in more familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But,
>>> IMO, you would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the
>>> problem, or use a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about
>>> "data tree"?
>>>
>>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a
>>> plural. To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called
>>> "On certain varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been
>>> pretty meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>>
>> "these"?
>
> Singular derived from the plural "theses"?

Or from the French? (thèse)
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote in message 
news:Kr%4i.4691$F_4.4437@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
> Peter Duncanson wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Stevens wrote:
>>>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>>>> Hello!
>>>>>
>>>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize
>>>>> document representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be
>>>>> wrong to use the
>>>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization
>>>>> has
>>>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>>>> properties).
>>>>> My question is:
>>>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>>>> institutional sense only?
>>>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>>>
>>>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a
>>>> word in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to
>>>> be what you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word
>>>> in more familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But,
>>>> IMO, you would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the
>>>> problem, or use a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about
>>>> "data tree"?
>>>>
>>>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a
>>>> plural. To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called
>>>> "On certain varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been
>>>> pretty meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>>>
>>> "these"?
>>
>> Singular derived from the plural "theses"?
>
> Or from the French? (thèse)

Someone else should write a those on it.

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f31s35$2ln3$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>>
>> ad 3: array, disposition, formation
>
> Would "formations" be correct?
>

I don't see why not. I can imagine a sentence like "The Red Arrows 
demonstrate a variety of formations in their flying display: diamond, delta, 
swallowtail, square and so on." So if your 'organizations' are at all 
analogous to the different ways of arranging nine aircraft in flight, then 
'formations' would surely convey the concept you are trying to put across. I 
would nonetheless prefer 'arrays'.

Another word which comes to mind is 'configurations'. Perhaps if you were to 
post back with a sample sentence or two from your dissertation, someone 
would be able to pinpoint the most appropriate term.

-- 
Noel

Michael Preminger wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the
> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a
> plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able
> to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
> properties).
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
> institutional sense only?

Yes. Organization in the sense, "I need more organization in my life' is 
always in the singular, like 'information' and other words. That sis 'I 
need to organise my life better'.In the institutional sense there is no 
problem for there it means more structures/organizations rather than the 
'attitude' organization.

> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

You don't need any, in the sense "data (or information) organization" 
you'll always be in the 'singular' (collective if you like).

John of Aix wrote:
> Michael Preminger wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>> to use the
>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>> properties).
>> My question is:
>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>> institutional sense only?
>
> Yes. Organization in the sense, "I need more organization in my life'
> is always in the singular, like 'information' and other words. That
> sis 'I need to organise my life better'.In the institutional sense
> there is no problem for there it means more structures/organizations
> rather than the 'attitude' organization.
>
>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>> 3. Any other suggestions
>
> You don't need any, in the sense "data (or information) organization"
> you'll always be in the 'singular' (collective if you like).

Yes, but he was misusing the term in "a data organization" when he meant "a 
data structure" or "a data arrangement" (it is a bit of a puzzle as to why 
"arrangement" shouldn't be open to the same sort of criticism as 
"organization"...)
-- 
John Briggs

Michael Preminger wrote:

> 
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions
> 


Data organization systems ?

-- 
Blue Sow

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).

In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.

There are many other differences in the way the language is used, and in the 
ways that we communicate between ourselves in the UK, so this is the wrong 
place for you to ask such a question.

Seek an appropriate group.

Mark Wallace wrote:
> "Michael Preminger"  wrote in message
> news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.

Not always - but I always do, if only to annoy Americans :-)
-- 
John Briggs

John Briggs schrieb:
> Mark Wallace wrote:
> 
>>"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message
>>news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>>
>>>Hello!
>>>
>>>I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>
>>>In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>>In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.
> 
> 
> Not always - but I always do, if only to annoy Americans :-)

I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and the 
OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a second 
language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are simpler.

Regards, Einde O'Callaghan

In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a second
>language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are simpler.

All you wanted to know, and more, here:

  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206

-- 
Mike Barnes

Michael Preminger wrote:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

"Different schemes of data organisation", "methods of...", "patterns 
of...", or even the dreaded "paradigms of...", would be my choice. I 
take it that "data structures" would be far too specific, and you are 
talking about networks of interlinked data structures.

Paul Burke

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document 
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the noun 
> "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a plural 
> for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able to talk 
> about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their properties).
>
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions
>

ad 3: array, disposition, formation

-- 
Noel

Mike Barnes wrote:
> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>> the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a
>> second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are
>> simpler.
>
> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>
>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206

At least two of those are wrong.
-- 
John Briggs

In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>>> the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a
>>> second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are
>>> simpler.
>>
>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>
>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>
>At least two of those are wrong.

In what respect?

-- 
Mike Barnes

Michael Preminger wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the
> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a
> plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able
> to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
> properties).
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
> institutional sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word in a 
new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what you are 
doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more familiar settings 
and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you would be better to coin a 
new phrase that avoids the problem, or use a word that doesn't present the 
problem.  How about "data tree"?

I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.  To 
algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain 
varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty meaningless 
without the plural "Algebras".


-- 
Mike Stevens
narrowboat Felis Catus III
web-site www.mike-stevens.co.uk

Defend the waterways.
Visit the web site www.saveourwaterways.org.uk

Mike Barnes wrote:
> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>> are simpler.
>>>
>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>
>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>
>> At least two of those are wrong.
>
> In what respect?

"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.

We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.
-- 
John Briggs

Mike Stevens wrote:
> Michael Preminger wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>> to use the
>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>> properties).
>> My question is:
>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>> institutional sense only?
>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>> 3. Any other suggestions
>
> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word
> in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what
> you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more
> familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you
> would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the problem, or use
> a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about "data tree"?
>
> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.
> To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain
> varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty
> meaningless without the plural "Algebras".

"these"?
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote in message 
news:L9F4i.496$qD.294@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
> Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>
>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>
>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>
>> In what respect?
>
> "Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.
>
> We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.

We appear to be in this thread.  Let's nay let the -ize have it!

In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>
>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>
>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>
>> In what respect?
>
>"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.

Where does any of them state that it is?

>We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.

How do you know?

-- 
Mike Barnes

"Mike Barnes"  wrote in message 
news:6OOASEFiozUGFw1y@g52lk5g23lkgk3lk345g.invalid...
> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>>
>>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>>
>>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>>
>>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>>
>>> In what respect?
>>
>>"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.
>
> Where does any of them state that it is?
>
>>We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.
>
> How do you know?

Pick up an English newspaper; they're where bad habits first rear their ugly 
heads.  I see no indication of "~ize" being used more frequently, or with 
different words, than before.

On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
 wrote:

>Mike Stevens wrote:
>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>
>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>
>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>>> to use the
>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>> properties).
>>> My question is:
>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>> institutional sense only?
>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>
>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word
>> in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what
>> you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more
>> familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you
>> would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the problem, or use
>> a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about "data tree"?
>>
>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.
>> To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain
>> varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty
>> meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>
>"these"?

Singular derived from the plural "theses"?

-- 
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in uk.culture.language.english)

> 
> ad 3: array, disposition, formation

Would "formations" be correct?

>

Peter Duncanson wrote:
> On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
>  wrote:
>
>> Mike Stevens wrote:
>>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>>> Hello!
>>>>
>>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>>
>>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>>
>>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize
>>>> document representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be
>>>> wrong to use the
>>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization
>>>> has
>>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>>> properties).
>>>> My question is:
>>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>>> institutional sense only?
>>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>>
>>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a
>>> word in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to
>>> be what you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word
>>> in more familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But,
>>> IMO, you would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the
>>> problem, or use a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about
>>> "data tree"?
>>>
>>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a
>>> plural. To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called
>>> "On certain varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been
>>> pretty meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>>
>> "these"?
>
> Singular derived from the plural "theses"?

Or from the French? (thèse)
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote in message 
news:Kr%4i.4691$F_4.4437@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
> Peter Duncanson wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Stevens wrote:
>>>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>>>> Hello!
>>>>>
>>>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize
>>>>> document representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be
>>>>> wrong to use the
>>>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization
>>>>> has
>>>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>>>> properties).
>>>>> My question is:
>>>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>>>> institutional sense only?
>>>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>>>
>>>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a
>>>> word in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to
>>>> be what you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word
>>>> in more familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But,
>>>> IMO, you would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the
>>>> problem, or use a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about
>>>> "data tree"?
>>>>
>>>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a
>>>> plural. To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called
>>>> "On certain varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been
>>>> pretty meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>>>
>>> "these"?
>>
>> Singular derived from the plural "theses"?
>
> Or from the French? (thèse)

Someone else should write a those on it.

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f31s35$2ln3$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>>
>> ad 3: array, disposition, formation
>
> Would "formations" be correct?
>

I don't see why not. I can imagine a sentence like "The Red Arrows 
demonstrate a variety of formations in their flying display: diamond, delta, 
swallowtail, square and so on." So if your 'organizations' are at all 
analogous to the different ways of arranging nine aircraft in flight, then 
'formations' would surely convey the concept you are trying to put across. I 
would nonetheless prefer 'arrays'.

Another word which comes to mind is 'configurations'. Perhaps if you were to 
post back with a sample sentence or two from your dissertation, someone 
would be able to pinpoint the most appropriate term.

-- 
Noel

Michael Preminger wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the
> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a
> plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able
> to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
> properties).
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
> institutional sense only?

Yes. Organization in the sense, "I need more organization in my life' is 
always in the singular, like 'information' and other words. That sis 'I 
need to organise my life better'.In the institutional sense there is no 
problem for there it means more structures/organizations rather than the 
'attitude' organization.

> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

You don't need any, in the sense "data (or information) organization" 
you'll always be in the 'singular' (collective if you like).

John of Aix wrote:
> Michael Preminger wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>> to use the
>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>> properties).
>> My question is:
>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>> institutional sense only?
>
> Yes. Organization in the sense, "I need more organization in my life'
> is always in the singular, like 'information' and other words. That
> sis 'I need to organise my life better'.In the institutional sense
> there is no problem for there it means more structures/organizations
> rather than the 'attitude' organization.
>
>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>> 3. Any other suggestions
>
> You don't need any, in the sense "data (or information) organization"
> you'll always be in the 'singular' (collective if you like).

Yes, but he was misusing the term in "a data organization" when he meant "a 
data structure" or "a data arrangement" (it is a bit of a puzzle as to why 
"arrangement" shouldn't be open to the same sort of criticism as 
"organization"...)
-- 
John Briggs

Michael Preminger wrote:

> 
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions
> 


Data organization systems ?

-- 
Blue Sow

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).

In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.

There are many other differences in the way the language is used, and in the 
ways that we communicate between ourselves in the UK, so this is the wrong 
place for you to ask such a question.

Seek an appropriate group.

Mark Wallace wrote:
> "Michael Preminger"  wrote in message
> news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.

Not always - but I always do, if only to annoy Americans :-)
-- 
John Briggs

John Briggs schrieb:
> Mark Wallace wrote:
> 
>>"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message
>>news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>>
>>>Hello!
>>>
>>>I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>
>>>In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>>In the UK, "organise" is spelled with an 's'.
> 
> 
> Not always - but I always do, if only to annoy Americans :-)

I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and the 
OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a second 
language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are simpler.

Regards, Einde O'Callaghan

In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a second
>language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are simpler.

All you wanted to know, and more, here:

  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206

-- 
Mike Barnes

Michael Preminger wrote:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

"Different schemes of data organisation", "methods of...", "patterns 
of...", or even the dreaded "paradigms of...", would be my choice. I 
take it that "data structures" would be far too specific, and you are 
talking about networks of interlinked data structures.

Paul Burke

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f2stq1$1cfj$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of 
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document 
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the noun 
> "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a plural 
> for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able to talk 
> about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their properties).
>
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the institutional 
> sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions
>

ad 3: array, disposition, formation

-- 
Noel

Mike Barnes wrote:
> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>> the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a
>> second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are
>> simpler.
>
> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>
>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206

At least two of those are wrong.
-- 
John Briggs

In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press and
>>> the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as a
>>> second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules are
>>> simpler.
>>
>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>
>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>
>At least two of those are wrong.

In what respect?

-- 
Mike Barnes

Michael Preminger wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>
> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>
> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data organization".
>
> Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong to use the
> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has a
> plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being able
> to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
> properties).
> My question is:
> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
> institutional sense only?
> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
> 3. Any other suggestions

As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word in a 
new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what you are 
doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more familiar settings 
and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you would be better to coin a 
new phrase that avoids the problem, or use a word that doesn't present the 
problem.  How about "data tree"?

I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.  To 
algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain 
varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty meaningless 
without the plural "Algebras".


-- 
Mike Stevens
narrowboat Felis Catus III
web-site www.mike-stevens.co.uk

Defend the waterways.
Visit the web site www.saveourwaterways.org.uk

Mike Barnes wrote:
> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>> are simpler.
>>>
>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>
>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>
>> At least two of those are wrong.
>
> In what respect?

"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.

We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.
-- 
John Briggs

Mike Stevens wrote:
> Michael Preminger wrote:
>> Hello!
>>
>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>
>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>
>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>> to use the
>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>> properties).
>> My question is:
>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>> institutional sense only?
>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>> 3. Any other suggestions
>
> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word
> in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what
> you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more
> familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you
> would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the problem, or use
> a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about "data tree"?
>
> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.
> To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain
> varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty
> meaningless without the plural "Algebras".

"these"?
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote in message 
news:L9F4i.496$qD.294@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
> Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>
>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>
>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>
>> In what respect?
>
> "Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.
>
> We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.

We appear to be in this thread.  Let's nay let the -ize have it!

In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>Mike Barnes wrote:
>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>
>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>
>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>
>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>
>> In what respect?
>
>"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.

Where does any of them state that it is?

>We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.

How do you know?

-- 
Mike Barnes

"Mike Barnes"  wrote in message 
news:6OOASEFiozUGFw1y@g52lk5g23lkgk3lk345g.invalid...
> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>Mike Barnes wrote:
>>> In uk.culture.language.english, John Briggs wrote:
>>>> Mike Barnes wrote:
>>>>> In uk.culture.language.english, Einde O'Callaghan wrote:
>>>>>> I believe that, among others, The Times, Oxford University Press
>>>>>> and the OED prefer the "-ize" spelling. As a teacher of English as
>>>>>> a second language I prefer the "-ise" spelling because the rules
>>>>>> are simpler.
>>>>>
>>>>> All you wanted to know, and more, here:
>>>>>
>>>>>  http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-ise1.htm
>>>>>  http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxizevsi.html
>>>>>  http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/index.pperl?date=19991206
>>>>
>>>> At least two of those are wrong.
>>>
>>> In what respect?
>>
>>"Recognize" is not the usual British spelling.
>
> Where does any of them state that it is?
>
>>We are not "more and more"  using the -ize ending.
>
> How do you know?

Pick up an English newspaper; they're where bad habits first rear their ugly 
heads.  I see no indication of "~ize" being used more frequently, or with 
different words, than before.

On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
 wrote:

>Mike Stevens wrote:
>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>
>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>
>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize document
>>> representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be wrong 
>>> to use the
>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization has
>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>> properties).
>>> My question is:
>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>> institutional sense only?
>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>
>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a word
>> in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to be what
>> you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word in more
>> familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But, IMO, you
>> would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the problem, or use
>> a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about "data tree"?
>>
>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a plural.
>> To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called "On certain
>> varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been pretty
>> meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>
>"these"?

Singular derived from the plural "theses"?

-- 
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in uk.culture.language.english)

> 
> ad 3: array, disposition, formation

Would "formations" be correct?

>

Peter Duncanson wrote:
> On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
>  wrote:
>
>> Mike Stevens wrote:
>>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>>> Hello!
>>>>
>>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>>
>>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>>
>>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize
>>>> document representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be
>>>> wrong to use the
>>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization
>>>> has
>>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>>> properties).
>>>> My question is:
>>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>>> institutional sense only?
>>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>>
>>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a
>>> word in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to
>>> be what you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word
>>> in more familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But,
>>> IMO, you would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the
>>> problem, or use a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about
>>> "data tree"?
>>>
>>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a
>>> plural. To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called
>>> "On certain varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been
>>> pretty meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>>
>> "these"?
>
> Singular derived from the plural "theses"?

Or from the French? (thèse)
-- 
John Briggs

"John Briggs"  wrote in message 
news:Kr%4i.4691$F_4.4437@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
> Peter Duncanson wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:51:26 GMT, "John Briggs"
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Stevens wrote:
>>>> Michael Preminger wrote:
>>>>> Hello!
>>>>>
>>>>> I am writing a thesis within Information Retrieval.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the thesis I am evaluating retrieval within different ways of
>>>>> organizing document representations in spaces (axis systems).
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a number of different types of such ways to organize
>>>>> document representations, to each of which I refer to as a "data
>>>>> organization". Recently one of my colleagues said that it would be
>>>>> wrong to use the
>>>>> noun "organization" in plural ("organizations"), as organization
>>>>> has
>>>>> a plural for the institutional sense only. I am dependent on being
>>>>> able to talk about those organiztions in plural (as I compare their
>>>>> properties).
>>>>> My question is:
>>>>> 1. Is it correct that "organization" has a plural for the
>>>>> institutional sense only?
>>>>> 2. Would "Arrangements" be any better?
>>>>> 3. Any other suggestions
>>>>
>>>> As a former academic (many years ago), I think that the use of a
>>>> word in a new sense defined in an academic paper (which appears to
>>>> be what you are doing) stands aside from previous uses of the word
>>>> in more familiar settings and may well have its own rules.  But,
>>>> IMO, you would be better to coin a new phrase that avoids the
>>>> problem, or use a word that doesn't present the problem.  How about
>>>> "data tree"?
>>>>
>>>> I common parlance, the word "algebra" probably doesn't have a
>>>> plural. To algebraists it certainly does.  My PhD these was called
>>>> "On certain varieties of Universal Algebras" and would have been
>>>> pretty meaningless without the plural "Algebras".
>>>
>>> "these"?
>>
>> Singular derived from the plural "theses"?
>
> Or from the French? (thèse)

Someone else should write a those on it.

"Michael Preminger"  wrote in message 
news:f31s35$2ln3$1@news01.tp.hist.no...
>>
>> ad 3: array, disposition, formation
>
> Would "formations" be correct?
>

I don't see why not. I can imagine a sentence like "The Red Arrows 
demonstrate a variety of formations in their flying display: diamond, delta, 
swallowtail, square and so on." So if your 'organizations' are at all 
analogous to the different ways of arranging nine aircraft in flight, then 
'formations' would surely convey the concept you are trying to put across. I 
would nonetheless prefer 'arrays'.

Another word which comes to mind is 'configurations'. Perhaps if you were to 
post back with a sample sentence or two from your dissertation, someone 
would be able to pinpoint the most appropriate term.

-- 
Noel