Synonymy avoidance

[Mullins, Bill]

Not to mention that switching would require that the National Institute
of Standards and Technology, (NIST, formerly the National Bureau of
Standards, or NBS) would have to dissolve its "Henna Division", a cadre
of mobile calibration standards  ready to report to field sites all over
America, and replace it with a "Peroxide Squadron", who would need to be
trained and otherwise brought up to speed.  Plus, "I Love Lucy" would be
pulled out of the Primary Standards repository and replaced with
"Baywatch".

> -----Original Message-----
> From: American Dialect Society
> [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Jonathan Lighter
> Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2005 6:36 AM
> To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Synonymy avoidance
>
> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       Jonathan Lighter <wuxxmupp2000 at YAHOO.COM>
> Subject:      Re: Synonymy avoidance
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------------
>
> Technically, yes. But the RCH appears to have been the
> accepted measure for at least sixty years.  Any switch to the
> BCH standard would require extensive industrial recalibration
> that could result in a slowing of economic growth.
>
> Cf. the ill-fated attempt to "go metric" many years ago.
>
> JL
>
> James C Stalker <stalker at MSU.EDU> wrote:
> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Sender: American Dialect Society
> Poster: James C Stalker
> Subject: Re: Synonymy avoidance
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------------
>
> But isn't an RCH bigger than a BCH?
>
> Jim
>
> Jonathan Lighter writes:
>
> > Call me old-fashioned, but I prefer "RCH."
> >
> > JL
> >