Re: AC electricity in CA

["Bernard G. Cleyet & Nancy Ann Seese" <georgeann@REDSHIFT.COM>]

My dict. has misled me so many times; I must purchase another.   I'll get
the one with the magnifier.

Since most of "you" prefer description, instead of prescription, you may
create neologisms at will.  However, Webster's editors did reject "yada
yada" for the 2001 edition -- laudate deum!


bc

P.s. It served well for  50 years.  (# 3 below is missing.  replaced by #
5 pl. wares; commodities.  In law a comprehensive name for .....)

Bob Sciamanda wrote:

> For the record, my Webster's Collegiate Dictionary gives as the third
> definition of the singular noun "good":
>
> "Something that has economic utility or satisfies an economic want."
>
> Bob Sciamanda (W3NLV)
> Physics, Edinboro Univ of PA (em)
> trebor@velocity.net
> http://www.velocity.net/~trebor
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Leigh Palmer" <palmer@SFU.CA>
> To: <PHYS-L@lists.nau.edu>
> Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2001 11:13 PM
> Subject: Re: AC electricity in CA
>
> > At 10:53 PM +0530 1/20/01, D.V.N.Sarma wrote:
> > > Just out of curiosity! Can 'good' be used in singular? Are there any
> > > precedents?
> > >
> > > I am possessed by  Perry Mason's  legal assistant
> > > who is so particular about precedents that he considered
> > > only a widow or a divorcee as a suitable person to marry!
> >
> > Then I'll refer you to the Oxford English Dictionary of which
> > I possess the "squint" edition*. According to the OED "good",
> > inter alia, is a substantive noun, like "water" or "air". It
> > is more commonly seen in its plural form.
> >
> > Leigh
> >
> > * It was cheap; it comes with a magnifying glass.