rectangle vs. square

[Mark Mandel]

One disagreement with Garson: example (3) is not relevant. "Square with"
refers to relative orientation, not to shape: '(of the room in question)
having the sides parallel with the sides of (the sepulchral chamber'.

m a m

On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 1:27 AM, Garson O'Toole
<adsgarsonotoole at gmail.com>wrote:

>
> I certainly agree that the issue is complex and context is important.
> Consider the following example in the domain of architecture. The
> writer assumes that the set of rectangular objects includes squares.
> Therefore he or she must explicitly rule out the inclusion of squares.
>
> [1] ... what Pliny tells us is that the building was rectangular (but
> not square), that it was surrounded by a colonnade of thirty-six
> columns, ...
>
> The parenthetical remark "(but not square)" would be redundant if the
> speaker thought that the set of rectangles already excluded squares.
> Here are another two examples:
>
> [2] Lumber is used that has rectangular, but not square, cross
> section, and is always oriented so that the longer dimension is
> parallel to the load (ie, usually is vertical).
>
> [3] This room was rectangular, but not square with the sepulchral
> chamber, as it lay 25° east of north ; …
>
>

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