rectangle vs. square

[Mark Mandel]

And then there's the other side of it. Looking at it from another angle:

rhombus (from M-W Online)
Date: circa 1567*
:* a parallelogram with four equal sides and sometimes one with no right
angles

rhomboid (ibid.)
Date: 1570*
:* a parallelogram with no right angles and with adjacent sides of unequal
length

m a m

PS: They spell it "Wiktionary", with a "k"


On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 8:49 PM, Robin Hamilton <
robin.hamilton3 at virginmedia.com> wrote:

> > ---------------------- Information from the mail
> > header -----------------------
> > Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> > Poster:       Dan Goncharoff <thegonch at GMAIL.COM>
> > Subject:      Re: rectangle vs. square
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > First, when did "rectangle" ever include "oblong"?
>
> Wictionary:  OBLONG:  2.  A rectangle having length greater than width.
>
> Thus, the set of Rectangles is (fully) comprised of two exclusive subsets:
> Squares [rectangles with four equal sides] and Oblongs [rectangles with
> sides of two equal lengths -- i.e. all members of the set 'Rectangle' which
> aren't members of the subset, 'Square'].
>
> > Second, what would be the justification for using "ellipse" when
> > describing
> > a circle, or rectangle for square? It may be correct, but it's not
> > informative.
>
> It makes perfect sense if you think in Venn diagrams.  <g>
>
>
>

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org