Re: ATM Re: Chretien

[Stephen Tonkin <astro@aegis1.demon.co.uk>]

Kevin Ferguson <kevin@aquilagroup.com> wrote:
>>No need to wonder, it's actually "Camichel" [ka-mee-SHELL (more or less)],
>>not "Carmichael"; and Foucault is "Foo-COH", not of course "Foo-Colt";
>>finally, as we all know, Ronchi is "RONG-kee", not "Raunchy".
>
>This is actually quite useful...many of us lack formal optical education,
>and books often don't give a clue as to pronunciation.  Makes it a little
>embarassing to talk when your not sure of the names.

The convolutions people get into mixing Classical and English
pronunciations of Latin star and constellation names cause me great
amusement, especially some of the genitives -- Microscopii, for example,
is usually pronounced with a mixture of both.

But who cares if you pronounce it "Spiker" (Eng)  or "Speaker"
(Classical), as long as it is obvious that you are referring to alpha
Virginis (now is that Verj-in-iss or Veerg-in-iss ?) :-)
>
>I think Fresnel is "FREH-nell", but is Couder "KOW-duhr", "KEW-duhr" or
>something completely different?

I use "KOO-day" (probably incorrect, but if you say it with enough
conviction, people will think you're right and they're wrong :-)  )

Turning slightly serious for a minute, I think it is an indictment of
our attitudes when people are put off using a word for fear of
embarrassment resulting from mispronunciation.  I'd rather be shown the
Ron-chee test by someone who knows how to use and interpret it than be
shown the Ron-kee test by someone who doesn't.

-- 
Stephen Tonkin            :    UK Amateur Telescope Making Pages
<sft@aegis1.demon.co.uk>  : <http://www.aegis1.demon.co.uk/atm.htm>