Loss of philological purity: Hybrid vigor or mongrelism?

Paul E. Neumann

doi:10.1002/ca.23062

Loss of philological purity: Hybrid vigor or mongrelism?

Paul E. Neumann

Medicine

Producción científica: Contribución a una revista › Artículo › revisión exhaustiva

2 Citas (Scopus)

Resumen

Although disparaged by philologists, hybrid words enrich technical and scientific vocabularies. They are common, so, like it or not, they are here to stay. On the other hand, where there are pre-existing purebred compound or affixed words, they should generally be given preference over hybrids. Some adjectives (e.g., laryngeus and sphenoideus) are discussed to illustrate these recommendations. Clin. Anat. 31:771–773, 2018.

Idioma original	English
Páginas (desde-hasta)	771-773
Número de páginas	3
Publicación	Clinical Anatomy
Volumen	31
N.º	6
DOI	https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.23062
Estado	Published - sep. 2018

Nota bibliográfica

Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

ASJC Scopus Subject Areas

Anatomy
Histology

PubMed: MeSH publication types

Journal Article

Acceder al documento

10.1002/ca.23062

Otros archivos y enlaces

Citar esto

@article{b13fb2a8e7734aa09a9ba0a1a74bec71,

title = "Loss of philological purity: Hybrid vigor or mongrelism?",

abstract = "Although disparaged by philologists, hybrid words enrich technical and scientific vocabularies. They are common, so, like it or not, they are here to stay. On the other hand, where there are pre-existing purebred compound or affixed words, they should generally be given preference over hybrids. Some adjectives (e.g., laryngeus and sphenoideus) are discussed to illustrate these recommendations. Clin. Anat. 31:771–773, 2018.",

author = "Neumann, {Paul E.}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.",

year = "2018",

month = sep,

doi = "10.1002/ca.23062",

language = "English",

volume = "31",

pages = "771--773",

journal = "Clinical Anatomy",

issn = "0897-3806",

publisher = "Wiley-Liss Inc.",

number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Loss of philological purity

T2 - Hybrid vigor or mongrelism?

AU - Neumann, Paul E.

PY - 2018/9

Y1 - 2018/9

N2 - Although disparaged by philologists, hybrid words enrich technical and scientific vocabularies. They are common, so, like it or not, they are here to stay. On the other hand, where there are pre-existing purebred compound or affixed words, they should generally be given preference over hybrids. Some adjectives (e.g., laryngeus and sphenoideus) are discussed to illustrate these recommendations. Clin. Anat. 31:771–773, 2018.

AB - Although disparaged by philologists, hybrid words enrich technical and scientific vocabularies. They are common, so, like it or not, they are here to stay. On the other hand, where there are pre-existing purebred compound or affixed words, they should generally be given preference over hybrids. Some adjectives (e.g., laryngeus and sphenoideus) are discussed to illustrate these recommendations. Clin. Anat. 31:771–773, 2018.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85043264427&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85043264427&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/ca.23062

DO - 10.1002/ca.23062

M3 - Article

C2 - 29446152

AN - SCOPUS:85043264427

SN - 0897-3806

VL - 31

SP - 771

EP - 773

JO - Clinical Anatomy

JF - Clinical Anatomy

IS - 6

ER -

Loss of philological purity: Hybrid vigor or mongrelism?

Resumen

Nota bibliográfica

ASJC Scopus Subject Areas

PubMed: MeSH publication types

Acceder al documento

Otros archivos y enlaces

Huella

Citar esto