* Smylers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-07-13 10:50]:
> When you first suggested those terms earlier in this thread I
> did find that I had to slow down when reading them to work out
> which is which.
>
> I had no such slowdown on reading David Landgren's mail.
Same here.
> I think it's just that "want" and "have" aren't in widespread
> use, so it took me a little longer to parse them. But they
> aren't a terrible choice, and I certainly won't complain if
> that's what we end up with.
I think there is deeper, objective reason for that, beyond habit.
One issue is that “have” and “want” are both auxiliary verbs and
have many connotations, so they give a hanging, open impression –
almost as if there was a question being asked. In contrast,
“expected” and “actual” are “closed” statements of fact with few
connotations.
The other is that if you visually compare
expect
actual
with
want
have
you’ll find the former pair differs much more greatly in word
shape.
“actual” has a strong upward orientation (t, l and u open to the
top, and the a shape is also upright), whereas “expect” has a
clear rightward motion (the two e’s and the c open to the right,
the p’s weight is to the right, and the x is neutral horizontal).
“want” and “have” are both visually compact, with a vertical
orientation but no clear direction. They even share a letter at
one position.
Regards,
--
Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>
