×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?
11

Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

(OP)
I see these two words used almost interchangeably in much engineering writing.  I've even seen it in other forums on this site.  Does anybody really not know the difference?

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

2
prin·ci·ple Pronunciation (prns-pl)n.
1. A basic truth, law, or assumption: the principles of democracy.
2.
  a. A rule or standard, especially of good behavior: a man of principle.
  b. The collectivity of moral or ethical standards or judgments: a decision based on principle rather than expediency.
3. A fixed or predetermined policy or mode of action.
4. A basic or essential quality or element determining intrinsic nature or characteristic behavior: the principle of self-preservation.
5. A rule or law concerning the functioning of natural phenomena or mechanical processes: the principle of jet propulsion.
6. Chemistry One of the elements that compose a substance, especially one that gives some special quality or effect.
7. A basic source. See Usage Note at principal.

---------------------------------------------------------

prin·ci·pal Pronunciation (prns-pl)adj.
1. First, highest, or foremost in importance, rank, worth, or degree; chief. See Synonyms at chief.
2. Of, relating to, or being financial principal, or a principal in a financial transaction. n.
1. One who holds a position of presiding rank, especially the head of an elementary school or high school.
2. A main participant in a situation.
3. A person having a leading or starring role.
4.
  a. The capital or main body of an estate or financial holding as distinguished from the interest or revenue from it.
  b. A sum of money owed as a debt, upon which interest is calculated.
5. Law
  a. A person who empowers another to act as his or her representative.
  b. The person having prime responsibility for an obligation as distinguished from one who acts as surety or as an endorser.
  c. One who commits or is an accomplice to a crime.
6. Architecture Either of a pair of inclined timbers forming the sides of a triangular truss for a pitched roof.

princi·pal·ship n.
Usage Note: Principal and principle are often confused but have no meanings in common. Principle is only a noun and usually refers to a rule or standard. Principal is both a noun and an adjective. As a noun, it has specialized meanings in law and finance, but in general usage it refers to a person who holds a high position or plays an important role: a meeting among all the principals in the transaction. As an adjective it has the sense of "chief" or "leading": The coach's principal concern is the quarterback's health.

_______________________________________
Feeling frisky.........
www.tailofthedragon.com

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Thanks guys, 'cause I'm one of those engineers.

I never (well maybe once and then forgot) knew there were two spellings depending on the definition. I've been confused on the spelling for years because I've seen it both ways so many times. Now I know why.

NozzleTwister
Houston, Texas

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

2
One easy way to remember that 'principal' is a person is that he is your pal - principal.

Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

The same thing happens with capital and capitol. The language barriers are worse than ever.

Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP3.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site (updated 06-21-05)
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

I think capital and capitol are even worse.

Washington DC is the USA capital city, but congress works in the Capitol building, deciding how to spend the nation's capital.

Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

I've seen then and than used interchangably on this site many times.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Unfortunately, the princiPAL was never my pal.

rmw

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

(OP)

Quote:

Unfortunately, the princiPAL was never my pal.

Too principled perhaps?

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?


Another pair that gets confused is physical and fiscal.

Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion
www.kitsonengineering.com

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

3
The physical / fiscal thing is one of my pet peaves. I struggle not to think poorly of people who misuse it, and I have heard people in the BANKING industry say "physical year..."! I have to keep telling myself that many very intellegent people may have never seen it spelled if they never took an accounting class, so they are just ignorant, not stupid. It's a struggle though. There is no excuse for the banking people however, that is just plain stupid for them not to know it.

Another really common one is affect and effect.

Quote (dictionary.com):

Usage Note: Affect and effect have no senses in common. As a verb affect is most commonly used in the sense of “to influence” (how smoking affects health). Effect means “to bring about or execute”: layoffs designed to effect savings. Thus the sentence These measures may affect savings could imply that the measures may reduce savings that have already been realized, whereas These measures may effect savings implies that the measures will cause new savings to come about.

Eng-Tips: Help for your job, not for your homework  Read FAQ731-376

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

And just to close the loop, "affect" is also a noun - a medical term used (I think) to describe mood levels.

A.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

(OP)
[quote Bryson's Dictionary of Troublesome Words]affect, effect. As a verb, affect means to influence ("Smoking may affect your health") or to adopt a pose or manner ("She affected ignorance"). Effect as a verb means to accomplish ("The prisoners effected an escape"). As a noun, the word needed is almost always effect (as in "personal effects" or "the damaging effects of war"). Affect as a noun has a narrow psychological meaning to do with emotional states (by way of which it is related to affection).[/quote]

Always a good book for resolving word issues.  The nice thing is that he also points out when differences are transatlantic (UK/US).

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

jraef,

I completely agree with your post.  The fiscal/physical thing drives me crazy, especially when I say "fiscal" and some says "what, oh, physical".

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?


Remember: cause and effect.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Quote (sauba):

... especially when I say "fiscal" and some says "what, oh, physical"
OMG, that would drive me over the edge. I can't stand anyone more smug than myself, especially if they are wrong!


I posted this in another thread, but my daughter recently wrote her University entrance essay and shared it with her HS English teacher. The teacher marked up her use of "affected", saying it should have been "effected", AND SHE WAS DEAD WRONG! Since this was a class asignment and it was going to have an effect on my daughter's grade, I took the teacher to task on it. She just wrote back and continues to insist that I am wrong, even though I have cited the expert references. Sheesh, and to think, I contribute to her salary!

Eng-Tips: Help for your job, not for your homework  Read FAQ731-376

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Take it to the principal, I mean principle.

What's the sentence in question?

Hg

Eng-Tips policies:  FAQ731-376

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?


I've seen in a recent post, in one of the engineering forums, the word particuls instead of particles. How can you explain this "deviation" ?

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

I'm not sure you've provided enough information and from which part to cull a good answer.

Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Compliment and complement
to, too, and two
their, there, and they're
how about this - flammable and inflammable

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Hg's humor was just TOO good, had to give a star!

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Also carrot and carats. One a vegetable. One, a unit of measure.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

And karats, a measure of gold content.

I sold my 14 karat gold ring with the 1/2 carat diamond to buy a carrot farm.

Along the lines of flammable and inflammable, another really commonly misused pair is regardless and irregardless. I hate it when I say "regardless of the fact..." and someone corrects me saying "You mean irregardless of the fact...". I point out to them that 'IRregardless' is not really a word, regardless of the fact that lots of people use it.

Eng-Tips: Help for your job, not for your homework  Read FAQ731-376

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

jraef,

Quote (jraef):

I sold my 14 karat gold ring with the 1/2 carat diamond to buy a carrot farm.

Good one. In my defense, I was going with the alliteration thing with the "c".

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

You didn't say anything wrong, a carat is a unit of measure in the weight of a gem. Karat is not so much a measurement as it is a statement of purity.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?


Principle nourishes the mind; principal the stomach.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Principal nourishes the stomach?  

Wha?

Hg

Eng-Tips policies:  FAQ731-376

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?


There's no such thing as a free lunch.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Took me a while too Hg.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Still not gettin' it.  I'm assuming the bit about free lunch is a hint, but...nope.

I'm not gonna like it when it's explained to me, either.  I can tell.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies:  FAQ731-376

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Judging from prominent Texan newsmakers -- GWB, Cheney, Delay, Hurwitz, Skilling, Anna Nicol Smith -- it seems that the principal principle of Texans is to put principal before principle.

Maybe unfair to the majority of Texans?

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

HgTX,
You need money (principal) to buy food (lunch). 2thumbsup

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Oh, I thought you were turning cannibal.

Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Greg,
Seem to recall you being Brit, so I appreciate your taste.  I must say, however, that I learned more than I ever needed to know about English cuisine from Sweeney Todd.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

The Principles of cooking a Principal Pie

Take one Principal,Bleed Well, Hang, and Peel
Crush 16 cloves of garlic
Peel and slice 4 kg of onions. Make sure no one cries, especially the Principal.
Discard the useless Parts of the Principal. Since he is a teacher, this might be more than you think. The Brain, in particular. Retain the Tongue, it will be well developed.

Make a crust
Put the useful Parts of the Principal into the pie dish,
add diverse vegetables, herbs and sundry seasonings
Cover with aforesaid crust.

Cook, as required

Serve.










Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Quote:

I learned more than I ever needed to know about English cuisine

Does that actually exist?  big smile

Cyril Guichard
Mechanical Engineer Consultant
France

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Rosbif

Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Bubble and squeak;
Toad in the Hole;
Shepards Pie;
Hotpot;
Mashed potatoes;
Haggis, Neeps and Tatties (except that's Scottish Cuisine);
Deep Fried Mars Bar;

We have a wealth of culinary delights.  These dishes take years to master.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

I figured it was some kind of principal vs. interest thing, but...I think of principal as a type of debt, not as cash in hand.

I told you I wouldn't like it.  I hate cryptic crosswords too.  They rely on deliberate misuse of idiom and it bugs me.

I like shepherd's pie though.  (Made with "I Can't Believe It's Not Shepherd", to tie to another old thread in another forum...)

Hg

Eng-Tips policies:  FAQ731-376

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

[RANT ON]

I have poor memory of English cuisine myself. But I sure will try again, maybe I'll be a little bit luckier. To my defense, I have to tell it is not easy to like foreign food when you're French blllttt

[RANT OFF]

Cyril Guichard
Mechanical Engineer Consultant
France

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

(OP)
You start to miss "English Cuisine" after a year or so in America.  Meat, meat, meat, all smothered with plastic cheese.  Vegetables being "garnish" that you're not supposed to eat.

I even started making my own Cornish Pasties when I lived there!

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

English Cuisine:
Lancashire Hot Pot (although residents and ex-pats of a certain county in the UK still consider this foreign)
Chicken Tikka Masarla (Indian style, UK invented)
Fish and Chips
Black pudding
Lincolnshire and Cumberland sausages
Truckers salad (may be universal)

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Under the proper conditions, both English and French cuisine can be palatible. But, a higher alcoholic content is customary for French.  Significance?

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

kenvlach,

higher alcoholic content is due to the fact we have so many good drinks we can't help drink them winky smile

Cyril Guichard
Mechanical Engineer Consultant
France

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

jraef,

Interesting - I hadn't come across the carat / karat distinction before. In British English (and Australian usage), "carat" is used for both the weight of gemstones AND for the purity of gold. (In fact, my Macquarie doesn't even list "karat" as an alternative spelling.)

By the way, you could also add the "caret" - a mark made in written or printed matter to show the place where something is to be inserted. I'm not sure how to get a proper caret to show in HTML, but an editor's mark-up of your example might look like this in Britain / Australia:

I sold my 14 karat [caret] gold ring with the 1/2 carat diamond to buy a carrot farm.
Link to caret: [Use "carat" not "karat" in standard British spelling]

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

So is there any real difference between a Principal Engineer and a Principle Engineer?  I see positions advertised for both titles all the time? I assume a Principle Engineer would apply first principles of Engineering and Physics to solve problems, but all Engineers do that I hope.  Perhaphs they really meant to say Principal Engineer, so everybody would know they are important!  I suppose we need to have Principal Principle Engineers.  Somebody call HR.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?


Although used indistinctly, carat and karat have different technical meanings.

Carat is a lapidary unit of weight of gemstones, equal to 200 mg. Aka metric carat.

Karat is a metallurgical unit for designating the fineness of gold in an alloy, represents a twenty-fourth part; thus 18-karat gold is 18/24 or 75% pure.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

PrinciPAL is the Headmaster of a school /owner of a business - the leader - he/she is someone's PAL.

In every other case use Principle - thats the best principle

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

My biggest pet peeves in spelling are the your/you're mixup and the their/they're/there trio.  

I also can't stand computer spell checkers.  I've come across many office workers that say, "I don't understand.  I ran it through the spell check."  For your amusement, enclosed is the link to my favorite piece on this subject:  "Candidate for a Pullet Surprise"

http://tenderbytes.net/rhymeworld/feeder/teacher/pullet.htm

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Like I always say...

Spell Checkers can't find the wrong words spelled right.

NozzleTwister
Houston, Texas

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

In principle principal is the boss.

Luis

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Then... I'll get it right if I can remember.

Newton was not a principal as opposed to Newton's Law of gravity, which is.  (???)

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

HA!Ha!

Very good

But Newton was inteligent he knew mesure the distances he was the one who discover the statement or principle. So he anderstood it !

The law says:

One big eengineer mass atracts other engineer mass by a force directed along the line conecting the two. This force is proporcional to the  product of the masses of the engeniers and inversely proportional to the sequare of the distance between them.

So if engineers don’t respect their masses distance, the more separarated they are the more stronger colision will be, but the one with the lower mass will sufer more.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Sorry

 according the law I should say: “So if engineers don’t respect their masses difference, the more closer they are the more stronger collision will be, but the one with the lower mass will suffer more”

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Heisenburg Uncertainty Principal: man of mystery.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

"It's" and 'its' are also annoying words that people constantly mix up.  Also, 'unthaw' is not a word.

As far as affect and effect are concerned, I generally stick with affect for a verb and effect for a noun.  I use a synonym for effect if I intend to convey 'bring about.'

A principle is a rule; a principal makes rules.

Regardless of how many times you use it, irregardless is not a word, and for the sake of English, I hope it never becomes one, unless it is used as a noun to denote 'the common usage of something that is incorrect' :)

Yes, English is lots o' fun.  Being Canadian, we are supposed to speak rather American and spell rather British; the problem is most people don't know which is which anymore when it comes to spelling and grammar.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

VxA and all,

Is 'unthaw' in common use in Canada or the northern US? I haven't  heard 'unthaw' used, but I have heard the word 'unthawed' from my dad who is from Wisconsin and others, I probably have used it.

I've heard it used like, "The meat is unthawed." Meaning of course, "The meat hasn't thawed out yet." or "The meat hasn't been thawed.

So, is 'unthawed' a word? It seams pretty handy.

NozzleTwister
Houston, Texas

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Can't help you there NozzleTwister... the only times I've ever heard 'unthaw' used is when someone really intends to say 'thaw'.  For example "Have you unthawed those steaks yet?"  I just checked my Gage Canadian English Dictionary and neither 'unthaw' nor any of its variants are listed. It is a quite common error in this neck of the woods though (eastern Canada).

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

'unthaw' is often, though incorrectly, used for "thaw" in Southern Ontario too.  I've also heard "dethaw", "unfreeze", and "unfrozed".  You've got to love how we butcher the language.

My personal favourites (Cdn spelling...favorites for US readers) are insure / ensure / assure; sometimes an engineer thing, but definitely an illiterate newspaper & magazine writer thing, and a lawyer thing too, and you wouldn't believe how often it's misused in patents!!!!!!!!!

I had a colleague I shared a pod with a while back that would say "irregardless"  about every third sentence...it's "irrespective of" or "regardless of"...I still have a flat spot on my forehead for hitting the desk so often!

Jim Sykes, P.Eng, GDTP-S
Profile Services
CAD-Documentation-GD&T-Product Development
www.profileservices.ca

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Well,

(on topic)

I only got a C in English and I'm Dyslexic.  How's that for an answer.

Also If I'm typing too fast and run spell check too fast I frequently correct to the wrong word.

(warning – off topic content)

That said I seem to have been appointed technical writer for my little section, which I find a little ironic given what I state in my first sentence.

Maybe it’s because being a Brit in the US I sound cleverer/fancier than I really am.

Anyone from the UK though wouldn’t think I sound intelligent, think a mix of Hampshire and Generic London accent.  (People from London reckon I’m a right carrot cruncher straight off the last turnip cart whilst people from deeper in the country think I’m from the big smoke.)

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Re: Priciple and principal: Very recently one of the national papers here made that very mistake on the front page-in the headline, "Principle"  was used instead of "Principal" in referring to head of a school..whereas in the article it was  spelt correctly.
So if even newspaper editors can't get it right...

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

From CajunCenturion:  Re: Capital/Capitol   "Washington DC is the USA capital city, but congress works in the Capitol building, deciding how to spend the nation's capital."

A bit of trivia: The word "capitol" did not exist until George Washington and others laying out the city of Washington, DC, (to be the capital of our new United States) were marking the location of the national legislative building (1792).  The group wanted to name the building something that would indicate the importance of the work done inside it, but the familiar word "parliament" smacked too strongly of royalty, which the new country was trying to get away from.  Someone - it may have been Washington himself, but I don't know for sure - suggested that they take the word "capital" and spell it with an 'o' to signify this important building.  And so, to this day, capitol buildings are in every capital in the United States.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

(OP)

Quote:

"parliament" smacked too strongly of royalty

During our revolution those two terms were virtually opposites.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Another confusion is the term "bated breath."  I saw an article on line the other day where the writer said we would wait with "baited breath" for the closing movies of a popular television series.  Maybe when I eat sardines for lunch, I have "baited breath," but usually when I am anxious for something, I have "bated" [held] breath.

Think of the word "abate" which means to lessen, decrease, or stop [hold back].  "After a heavy downpour, the late afternoon storm abated, and we were able to run out to our cars to go home."

At least on line, I don't have to worry if my breath is "baited" or not while conversing with others.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

True, Parliament was often (perhaps usually) at odds with the King.  I should have said that the word parliament was too closely associated with the country from which we had so recently separated ourselves.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Very interesting, Wabbit!  I am one of the abusers of "bated breath", clearly out of ignorance.  I looked it up on Websters online and confirmed it.

I always assumed it referred to waiting for something to happen like springing a baited trap or some such.  Clearly wrong.

thanks

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

The baited trap idea is pretty good.  The good thing is that you were thinking about the phrase when you used it, as opposed to just reciting by rote what you've heard before.

Another favorite misuse I see and hear a lot is the way the "carrot and stick" concept is used.  The original fable tells about how the farm boy's mule would not pull the plow, so the boy cut a long stick, tied it to the neck of the mule, and tied a carrot to the end of the stick.  This treat, dangling so close to the mule's nose, enticed the mule to move forward.

Most uses of this phrase are that the carrot and the stick are opposites of a choice - you either get beaten by the stick, or you are bribed by the carrot.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

I don't know why I haven't shared this before.

When I began my first job out of college about 30 years ago, I had taken a letter or memo to the secretary to type. She came back and asked if I had a dictionary. I told her no and she responded that we all need a dictionary and she would order one for me.

Then the Chief Engineer, who has to approve the purchase, called me in and asked me what I needed a dictionary for. I told him so I can check the spelling as required for what I write. He told me in a very strong tone in front of the secretary, "You don't need to know how to spell, I hired you to be an Engineer!"

A few minutes later the secretary brought me a brand new dictionary. She said, "I always keep a spare in my drawer for when this happens. I'll just order another to replace it. They always approve the dictionary purchases for the secretaries."

NozzleTwister
Houston, Texas

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Pretty damn funny.

If I keep reading documents with bad spelling my own suffers. I wonder how on earth typists used to cope.

Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

I find the abuse of there/their/they're another sign of a lazy writer.  They're, when used, seems the least likely of the three to be substituted for one of the others, but I've seen there and their each used for all three uses.  Arggh.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

(OP)
I had to explain the difference between its and it's to one of our former company directors a while back.  It took balls.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Back when people knew the difference between "baited" and "bated", that was the basis for a joke.

How do you catch a mouse?  You eat some cheese and wait by the mousehole with baited breath.

That's just not funny if "baited breath" is the normal expression.

How about "flout" vs. "flaunt"?  "Home in" vs. "Hone in"?  Ensure vs. insure vs. assure?  

This is one of my favo(u)rite language usage pages:
http://www.bartleby.com/64/3.html
(Though it's missing "home" vs. "hone")

Hg

Eng-Tips policies:  FAQ731-376

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

of instead of have

"I could of done better."

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

KENAT: "I could of done better."

Yes, that is an example of writing words based on how you hear them.  It's a contraction of "could have" which contracts into "could've," kind of slangy or colloquial, but acceptable English.  Rolling off the tongue, it sounds like "could of."  Of course, in this thread, we are kind of preaching to the choir - but don't we all enjoy poking at the ignorant!  I do pick up on some of my own errors in this forum, though.  I don't make a lot of grammatical errors, having had a good aptitude for the subject in school, but you never really learn it all, and if you don't use it, you do lose it to a degree, or you forget certain elements.  And it's easy to make mistakes in using idioms with which you may have never had any experience or study.  For so many of us, it never occurs to us to think about the origin of a saying; quite often, the origin and meaning are clear, but certainly not always.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Mute vs. moot.  I have heard this spoken, as well as written.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Well that's easy

A moot point is one you agree on, so you don't need to discuss it.

A mute point is one you don't discuss anyway.

End result is the same...

Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Loose and lose tick me off to no end.

RE: Why can't engineers differentiate between principle and principal?

Quote (eric1037):

Loose and lose tick me off to no end.
I've gone out of my way to avoid those words because I can always spell either of them correctly and the grammar check in Word won't keep me straight.  And when using something with just a spell checker I have no hope of making sure I have the right one.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources