Subject:
|
Re: Lowest Common Denominator (was: Re: Lego.com - new look)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.geek
|
Date:
|
Sun, 17 Oct 1999 18:41:56 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
502 times
|
| |
![Post a public reply to this message](/news/icon-reply.gif) | |
Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in article
<380a066d.171574518@lugnet.com>...
>
> The 1961 dead-trees M-W defines "lowest common denominator" as:
>
> 1: the lowest common multiple of two or more denominators.
> 2: something (as a quality or level of taste) that typifies or is common,
> acceptable, or comprehensible to all or the greatest possible number
> of individuals. <the committee system...reduces all ideas to the
> lowest common denominator --M.W.Straight> <broadcasting...falls into
> the error of producing programs at the lowest common denominator
> --Franklin Dunham> <living together in boredom, men exhibit their
> lowest common denominator --Clement Greenberg> <the quest by...the
> movies and radio for lowest common denominators --John Collier b.1884>
>
> Looks like the non-math use of "lowest common denominator" goes back several
> decades, at least. I don't have an OED handy to check if it goes back even
> further. M-W online did say that "denominator" went back to at least the
> late 16th Century.
I have to be honest Todd... much of your math was just over my head.
Sorry. :(
Just kidding, but I really never was much good with fractions.
But I did find this 2nd definition from the '61 M-W to be interesting. It
pretty much is what I intended by my comment, and is the way in which I
believed the expression was to have been used. I wonder if it's possible
that the mathematical definition and the common usage for this expression
are not entirely compatible? When you present equations using numbers it
certainly seems to support one case. However the common usage (be it right
or wrong) seems to be similar to the way in which I used it, and in fact
the way in which this dictionary defines it.
My Funk and Wagnells Standard College Dictionary lists only the
mathematical usage of the expression, so I'm not sure that I'm equipped to
defend myself any further. :) However, I think a case can be made for
both definitions, depending on the context.
Best regards,
Allan
--
Expert Builder Website - The Megaproject Showcase
http://www.execulink.com/~apotome/expert.htm
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
30 Messages in This Thread: ![Lego.com - new look -James Brown (15-Oct-99 to lugnet.general)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![Re: Lego.com - new look -Kevin Wilson (15-Oct-99 to lugnet.general)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Lego.com - new look -David Eaton (15-Oct-99 to lugnet.general)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![Re: Lego.com - new look -Fredrik Glöckner (15-Oct-99 to lugnet.general)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![Re: Lego.com - new look -Alex Roode (16-Oct-99 to lugnet.general)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/268.gif) ![Re: Lego.com - new look -Allan Bedford (15-Oct-99 to lugnet.general)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Lego.com - new look -Christian Holtje (16-Oct-99 to lugnet.general)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![Disabled unfriendly Lego -Christian Holtje (16-Oct-99 to lugnet.general)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Disabled unfriendly Lego -Craig Hamilton (16-Oct-99 to lugnet.general)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/268.gif) ![Re: Lego.com - new look -Allan Bedford (16-Oct-99 to lugnet.general)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Lego.com - new look -Matthew Miller (16-Oct-99 to lugnet.general)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Lego.com - new look -Allan Bedford (17-Oct-99 to lugnet.general)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![Re: Lego.com - new look -Matthew Miller (17-Oct-99 to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![Lowest Common Denominator (was: Re: Lego.com - new look) -Todd Lehman (17-Oct-99 to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![You are here](/news/here.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![Re: Lowest Common Denominator (was: Re: Lego.com - new look) -Matthew Miller (17-Oct-99 to lugnet.off-topic.geek)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![Re: Lowest Common Denominator (was: Re: Lego.com - new look) -Todd Lehman (17-Oct-99 to lugnet.off-topic.geek)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![Re: Lowest Common Denominator (was: Re: Lego.com - new look) -Todd Lehman (17-Oct-99 to lugnet.off-topic.geek)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Lowest Common Denominator (was: Re: Lego.com - new look) -Matthew Miller (17-Oct-99 to lugnet.off-topic.geek)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![Re: Lowest Common Denominator (was: Re: Lego.com - new look) -Matthew Miller (17-Oct-99 to lugnet.off-topic.geek)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Lowest Common Denominator (was: Re: Lego.com - new look) -Todd Lehman (17-Oct-99 to lugnet.off-topic.geek)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![(Cancelled)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![Re: Lowest Common Denominator (was: Re: Lego.com - new look) -Todd Lehman (17-Oct-99 to lugnet.off-topic.geek)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![Re: Lowest Common Denominator (was: Re: Lego.com - new look) -Matthew Miller (17-Oct-99 to lugnet.off-topic.geek)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/246.gif) ![Re: Lowest Common Denominator (was: Re: Lego.com - new look) -Larry Pieniazek (17-Oct-99 to lugnet.off-topic.geek)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![Re: Lowest Common Denominator (was: Re: Lego.com - new look) -Todd Lehman (17-Oct-99 to lugnet.off-topic.geek)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: Lowest Common Denominator (was: Re: Lego.com - new look) -Matthew Miller (17-Oct-99 to lugnet.off-topic.geek)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/28.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![my biggest problem with www.lego.com -Remy Evard (17-Oct-99 to lugnet.general)](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/46.gif) ![Re: my biggest problem with www.lego.com -Mark Herzberg (17-Oct-99 to lugnet.general)](/news/x.gif)
![](/news/x.gif) ![](/news/68.gif) ![Re: Lego.com - new look) -Bram Lambrecht (18-Oct-99 to lugnet.off-topic.geek)](/news/x.gif)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|