Grok
Note: There is a profusion of labels for the various logics. This entry is about one such label.
1
2d order logic
Second-Order Logic (often abbreviated as "2nd-order logic" or "SOL") is an extension of first-order logic (FOL) that allows quantification not only over individual elements of a domain but also over predicates, relations, sets of individuals, or functions.
Key Differences from First-Order Logic
First-order logic: Quantifiers (∀, ∃) apply only to individual variables (e.g., ∀x P(x) means "for every individual x, P holds").
Second-order logic: Adds quantifiers over relation variables (e.g., ∀R ... means "for every relation R") or set variables (in monadic second-order logic, often ∀X where X is a unary predicate representing a set).
This increases expressive power significantly.
Syntax Example
In second-order logic, you can have formulas like:
∃X ∀x (X(x) ↔ φ(x)), where X is a predicate variable (this is a comprehension schema, asserting the existence of a set defined by φ).
∀X (X(0) ∧ ∀y (X(y) → X(s(y))) → ∀y X(y)) — part of the induction axiom in second-order Peano arithmetic.
A classic example distinguishing it from FOL:
Continuity of a function can't be fully expressed in FOL but can in second-order.
Ancestor relation: In a graph with Parent(x,y), "x is ancestor of y" requires second-order quantification over paths/sets.
Properties
Expressiveness: Can categorically characterize structures like the natural numbers (second-order Peano arithmetic has only one model up to isomorphism: the standard ℕ), unlike FOL which has non-standard models.
Semantics: There are two main kinds:
Full/standard semantics: Quantifiers range over all possible subsets/relations (the full powerset). This leads to high expressive power but no completeness theorem.
Henkin semantics: Quantifiers range over a subset of relations (like in multi-sorted FOL), preserving completeness and compactness.
Drawbacks compared to FOL:
No complete deductive system for full semantics (by Gödel's incompleteness).
Lacks compactness and Löwenheim-Skolem theorems in full semantics.
Validity is not recursively enumerable.
Why It's Important
Second-order logic bridges FOL and set theory. Some philosophers (e.g., Quine) called it "set theory in disguise" due to its commitment to powersets, while others see it as a natural extension for foundations of mathematics (stronger than Peano arithmetic but weaker than full ZFC).
If this isn't what you meant by "2d order logic" (perhaps a typo for "second-order" or something else like two-dimensional logic in modal/temporal contexts), feel free to clarify!
\
Sunday, February 22, 2026
Apiru, Shashu, Kenite. AI
Grok
1 Apiru, Shashu, Kenite
Apiru (Habiru or ʿApiru)
The Apiru (also spelled Habiru or ʿApiru) were a social class documented in ancient Near Eastern texts from the 2nd millennium BCE, including the Amarna Letters (14th century BCE). They appeared as semi-nomadic or marginalized people—often rebels, outlaws, mercenaries, laborers, servants, or displaced persons—across regions like Mesopotamia, Anatolia, Syria, Canaan, and Egypt.
They formed a multi-ethnic group, not a single ethnicity, and sometimes posed threats to settled city-states (e.g., in Canaanite rulers' complaints to Egyptian pharaohs).
Etymologically, the term links to the biblical "Hebrew" (ʿIbri), with some scholars (e.g., Nadav Na’aman) arguing "Hebrew" derives from it, originally a social designation that later became ethnic for Israelites. However, consensus holds Apiru as a broader socioeconomic term, not identical to Hebrews—though some proto-Israelites or Hebrews may have been among them.
The Amarna Letters and tablets 1406 - 1340 BC. Conquest of ... bible.ca
The Amarna Letters: Proof of Israel's Invasion of Canaan ... armstronginstitute.org
Shasu (Shasu)
The Shasu were Semitic-speaking pastoral nomads in the southern Levant (Sinai, Transjordan, Edom/Moab) during the Late Bronze Age (14th–13th centuries BCE). Egyptian texts depict them as tent-dwelling herders, sometimes brigands or captives.
Crucially, inscriptions from Soleb (Amenhotep III, ~1400 BCE) and Amarah-West refer to "the land of the Shasu of Yhwꜣ" (or "Shasu of Yahweh"), the earliest extrabiblical reference to the divine name YHWH/Yahweh—predating the Mesha Stele by centuries.
Scholars often associate these Shasu with regions like Seir/Edom, aligning with biblical descriptions of Yahweh "coming from Seir" (Deut. 33:2; Judg. 5:4). Some propose Shasu groups contributed to early Israelite ethnogenesis.
Ancient Egyptian relief depicting Shasu people facebook.com
Captives from beyond the southern border. Detail of a scene ... facebook.com
The Soleb Inscription: Earliest-Discovered Use of the Name ... armstronginstitute.org
THE SOLEB INSCRIPTION (Amenhotep III ca. 1390-1352) - When ... facebook.com
Kenites
The Kenites were a nomadic or semi-nomadic tribe in the southern Levant (Negev, Midian, Edom), often allied with Israelites in the Bible (e.g., Jethro, Moses' father-in-law, a Kenite/Midianite priest; Judg. 1:16; 4:11).
They associated with metalworking (from Cain/Qayin, linked etymologically) and lived among groups like Midianites and Amalekites.
The Kenite hypothesis (or Midianite-Kenite hypothesis) posits that Yahweh worship originated among southern nomads like Kenites/Midianites, introduced to proto-Israelites via Moses' ties to Jethro (Exod. 3; 18). This explains Yahweh's southern origins (Seir, Paran, Teman) and absence from early Canaanite pantheons.
Connections to Early Israelites/Hebrews
These terms overlap in discussions of Israelite origins:
Apiru → Provide a social parallel (marginalized nomads) and possible etymological root for "Hebrew."
Shasu → Offer the earliest Yahweh attestation and geographic ties to biblical southern traditions.
Kenites → Suggest a mechanism for adopting Yahweh via Midianite/Kenite alliances.
Early Israel likely emerged from a mix of Canaanite settlers, nomads (including Shasu and Kenite-like groups), and possibly Apiru elements—forming a distinct Yahwistic identity in the highlands by the Iron Age.
These reflect complex, multi-faceted origins rather than a single group.
1 Apiru, Shashu, Kenite
Apiru (Habiru or ʿApiru)
The Apiru (also spelled Habiru or ʿApiru) were a social class documented in ancient Near Eastern texts from the 2nd millennium BCE, including the Amarna Letters (14th century BCE). They appeared as semi-nomadic or marginalized people—often rebels, outlaws, mercenaries, laborers, servants, or displaced persons—across regions like Mesopotamia, Anatolia, Syria, Canaan, and Egypt.
They formed a multi-ethnic group, not a single ethnicity, and sometimes posed threats to settled city-states (e.g., in Canaanite rulers' complaints to Egyptian pharaohs).
Etymologically, the term links to the biblical "Hebrew" (ʿIbri), with some scholars (e.g., Nadav Na’aman) arguing "Hebrew" derives from it, originally a social designation that later became ethnic for Israelites. However, consensus holds Apiru as a broader socioeconomic term, not identical to Hebrews—though some proto-Israelites or Hebrews may have been among them.
The Amarna Letters and tablets 1406 - 1340 BC. Conquest of ... bible.ca
The Amarna Letters: Proof of Israel's Invasion of Canaan ... armstronginstitute.org
Shasu (Shasu)
The Shasu were Semitic-speaking pastoral nomads in the southern Levant (Sinai, Transjordan, Edom/Moab) during the Late Bronze Age (14th–13th centuries BCE). Egyptian texts depict them as tent-dwelling herders, sometimes brigands or captives.
Crucially, inscriptions from Soleb (Amenhotep III, ~1400 BCE) and Amarah-West refer to "the land of the Shasu of Yhwꜣ" (or "Shasu of Yahweh"), the earliest extrabiblical reference to the divine name YHWH/Yahweh—predating the Mesha Stele by centuries.
Scholars often associate these Shasu with regions like Seir/Edom, aligning with biblical descriptions of Yahweh "coming from Seir" (Deut. 33:2; Judg. 5:4). Some propose Shasu groups contributed to early Israelite ethnogenesis.
Ancient Egyptian relief depicting Shasu people facebook.com
Captives from beyond the southern border. Detail of a scene ... facebook.com
The Soleb Inscription: Earliest-Discovered Use of the Name ... armstronginstitute.org
THE SOLEB INSCRIPTION (Amenhotep III ca. 1390-1352) - When ... facebook.com
Kenites
The Kenites were a nomadic or semi-nomadic tribe in the southern Levant (Negev, Midian, Edom), often allied with Israelites in the Bible (e.g., Jethro, Moses' father-in-law, a Kenite/Midianite priest; Judg. 1:16; 4:11).
They associated with metalworking (from Cain/Qayin, linked etymologically) and lived among groups like Midianites and Amalekites.
The Kenite hypothesis (or Midianite-Kenite hypothesis) posits that Yahweh worship originated among southern nomads like Kenites/Midianites, introduced to proto-Israelites via Moses' ties to Jethro (Exod. 3; 18). This explains Yahweh's southern origins (Seir, Paran, Teman) and absence from early Canaanite pantheons.
Connections to Early Israelites/Hebrews
These terms overlap in discussions of Israelite origins:
Apiru → Provide a social parallel (marginalized nomads) and possible etymological root for "Hebrew."
Shasu → Offer the earliest Yahweh attestation and geographic ties to biblical southern traditions.
Kenites → Suggest a mechanism for adopting Yahweh via Midianite/Kenite alliances.
Early Israel likely emerged from a mix of Canaanite settlers, nomads (including Shasu and Kenite-like groups), and possibly Apiru elements—forming a distinct Yahwistic identity in the highlands by the Iron Age.
These reflect complex, multi-faceted origins rather than a single group.
The German Ideology summary. AI
Claude
Summarize "The German Ideology"
"The German Ideology" is an early philosophical work by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, written in 1845-46 but not published until 1932. Here's a summary of its main ideas:
Core Thesis: Marx and Engels argue that consciousness and ideas don't shape material reality—rather, material conditions and human productive activity shape consciousness. This inverts the idealist philosophy dominant in Germany at the time.
Historical Materialism: The work develops their theory of historical materialism, which holds that human history progresses through different modes of production (like feudalism, capitalism). The economic base of society—how people produce and distribute goods—determines the political and ideological superstructure.
Critique of German Philosophers: A large portion critiques "Young Hegelian" philosophers (particularly Ludwig Feuerbach, Bruno Bauer, and Max Stirner) for focusing on abstract ideas and consciousness while ignoring real material conditions. Marx and Engels mock these thinkers for believing that changing ideas alone could change the world.
Division of Labor: They trace how the division of labor creates class divisions and alienation. As labor becomes increasingly specialized and separated from the products it creates, workers lose control over their own activity.
Ideology as False Consciousness: The dominant ideas in any society, they argue, are the ideas of the ruling class. Ideology serves to justify and perpetuate existing power relations while obscuring the true material basis of society.
This text laid crucial groundwork for Marxist theory and remains foundational to understanding Marx's later economic and political works.
Why did it take 90 years to see daylight?
The nearly 90-year delay in publishing "The German Ideology" resulted from several factors:
Never Completed or Prepared for Publication: Marx and Engels never finished the manuscript in a publishable form. It was a sprawling, often polemical work that they abandoned once they felt they had clarified their own thinking. Marx later famously said they left the manuscript to "the gnawing criticism of the mice"—meaning they were content to let it go unpublished since it had served its purpose of working out their ideas.
Lack of Publisher Interest: They did try to find a publisher initially, but no one was willing to take it on. The work was long, highly critical of obscure German philosophers, and lacked the immediate political relevance that might have attracted a publisher. The intense focus on critiquing thinkers like Max Stirner made it seem too niche.
Marx's Priorities Shifted: After 1846, Marx moved on to more pressing political work and eventually to developing his economic theories. He focused on "Das Kapital" and other projects he deemed more important for the workers' movement.
Manuscript Scattered and Difficult: The manuscript itself was chaotic—written in multiple hands, with sections incomplete, heavily revised, and physically scattered. This made it difficult for anyone to compile and publish even if they wanted to.
Finally Published in 1932: The Marx-Engels Institute in Moscow finally assembled and published the fragments in 1932 as part of collecting Marx and Engels's complete works. By then, Marxism had become a major political force, making even their early unpublished writings historically significant.
So communist editors massaged the ms into something readable in much the same manner as Nietzsche's executors molded Will to Power?
That's a provocative comparison, but there are important differences in how these two texts were handled:
Key Differences:
The German Ideology was genuinely authored by Marx and Engels—they wrote every word, even if they never finished organizing it. The Soviet editors in 1932 assembled existing fragments and made editorial decisions about structure, but they weren't fabricating content or stitching together random notes into arguments the authors never intended.
The Will to Power, by contrast, is far more problematic. Nietzsche never planned a book by that title. His sister Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche and collaborators compiled it from notebooks, unpublished fragments, and jottings—often selecting and arranging passages to suit their own (sometimes nationalist and anti-Semitic) agenda. Nietzsche had explicitly abandoned plans for such a work.
Legitimate Concerns About The German Ideology:
That said, you're right to be cautious. The 1932 Soviet edition did involve editorial choices about:
Which sections to include or prioritize
How to order the fragmented material
How to present the chaotic manuscript as a coherent "work"
Given that this happened under Stalin's regime, there were certainly ideological motivations in how they presented Marx's early thought.
Modern Scholarship:
Later editions (particularly the Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe or MEGA project) have provided more transparent presentations of the manuscripts, showing revisions, crossings-out, and the actual state of the text. These reveal just how unfinished it really was.
So: less outright fabrication than Will to Power, but still shaped by editorial hands with their own agendas.
Not much outright fabrication in WM. It's mostly about selectivity and sequence. In fact Nietzsche had planned such a work (ph he would have used a different title) but ran out of gas in his final pre-collapse years
You're absolutely right, and I apologize for overstating the case. Thanks for the correction.
More Accurate Picture of Will to Power:
Nietzsche did plan a major systematic work in his late period—he experimented with various titles and outlines for it throughout the 1880s. The Will to Power represents one of those projected titles. The material Elisabeth and Peter Gast compiled came from genuine Nietzsche notebooks, not fabrications.
The problems, as you note, are indeed about selectivity and arrangement: which fragments to include, which to exclude, how to order them to create an apparent argument, and which outline scheme to follow among Nietzsche's many abandoned plans. Elisabeth's editorial choices were influenced by her nationalist politics and her desire to present a particular "systematic" Nietzsche.
The Parallel Holds Better:
So your original comparison is actually quite apt. Both texts involve:
Genuine authorial material left unfinished
Editors with ideological commitments making choices about structure
Posthumous assembly creating a "work" the authors never finalized
Later scholarly editions revealing the messy reality behind the published versions
The key question in both cases becomes: how much do editorial decisions about sequence and selection shape our understanding of the thinker's ideas? With both The German Ideology and The Will to Power, we're reading something filtered through others' interpretive lenses, even if the underlying words are authentic.
Summarize "The German Ideology"
"The German Ideology" is an early philosophical work by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, written in 1845-46 but not published until 1932. Here's a summary of its main ideas:
Core Thesis: Marx and Engels argue that consciousness and ideas don't shape material reality—rather, material conditions and human productive activity shape consciousness. This inverts the idealist philosophy dominant in Germany at the time.
Historical Materialism: The work develops their theory of historical materialism, which holds that human history progresses through different modes of production (like feudalism, capitalism). The economic base of society—how people produce and distribute goods—determines the political and ideological superstructure.
Critique of German Philosophers: A large portion critiques "Young Hegelian" philosophers (particularly Ludwig Feuerbach, Bruno Bauer, and Max Stirner) for focusing on abstract ideas and consciousness while ignoring real material conditions. Marx and Engels mock these thinkers for believing that changing ideas alone could change the world.
Division of Labor: They trace how the division of labor creates class divisions and alienation. As labor becomes increasingly specialized and separated from the products it creates, workers lose control over their own activity.
Ideology as False Consciousness: The dominant ideas in any society, they argue, are the ideas of the ruling class. Ideology serves to justify and perpetuate existing power relations while obscuring the true material basis of society.
This text laid crucial groundwork for Marxist theory and remains foundational to understanding Marx's later economic and political works.
Why did it take 90 years to see daylight?
The nearly 90-year delay in publishing "The German Ideology" resulted from several factors:
Never Completed or Prepared for Publication: Marx and Engels never finished the manuscript in a publishable form. It was a sprawling, often polemical work that they abandoned once they felt they had clarified their own thinking. Marx later famously said they left the manuscript to "the gnawing criticism of the mice"—meaning they were content to let it go unpublished since it had served its purpose of working out their ideas.
Lack of Publisher Interest: They did try to find a publisher initially, but no one was willing to take it on. The work was long, highly critical of obscure German philosophers, and lacked the immediate political relevance that might have attracted a publisher. The intense focus on critiquing thinkers like Max Stirner made it seem too niche.
Marx's Priorities Shifted: After 1846, Marx moved on to more pressing political work and eventually to developing his economic theories. He focused on "Das Kapital" and other projects he deemed more important for the workers' movement.
Manuscript Scattered and Difficult: The manuscript itself was chaotic—written in multiple hands, with sections incomplete, heavily revised, and physically scattered. This made it difficult for anyone to compile and publish even if they wanted to.
Finally Published in 1932: The Marx-Engels Institute in Moscow finally assembled and published the fragments in 1932 as part of collecting Marx and Engels's complete works. By then, Marxism had become a major political force, making even their early unpublished writings historically significant.
So communist editors massaged the ms into something readable in much the same manner as Nietzsche's executors molded Will to Power?
That's a provocative comparison, but there are important differences in how these two texts were handled:
Key Differences:
The German Ideology was genuinely authored by Marx and Engels—they wrote every word, even if they never finished organizing it. The Soviet editors in 1932 assembled existing fragments and made editorial decisions about structure, but they weren't fabricating content or stitching together random notes into arguments the authors never intended.
The Will to Power, by contrast, is far more problematic. Nietzsche never planned a book by that title. His sister Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche and collaborators compiled it from notebooks, unpublished fragments, and jottings—often selecting and arranging passages to suit their own (sometimes nationalist and anti-Semitic) agenda. Nietzsche had explicitly abandoned plans for such a work.
Legitimate Concerns About The German Ideology:
That said, you're right to be cautious. The 1932 Soviet edition did involve editorial choices about:
Which sections to include or prioritize
How to order the fragmented material
How to present the chaotic manuscript as a coherent "work"
Given that this happened under Stalin's regime, there were certainly ideological motivations in how they presented Marx's early thought.
Modern Scholarship:
Later editions (particularly the Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe or MEGA project) have provided more transparent presentations of the manuscripts, showing revisions, crossings-out, and the actual state of the text. These reveal just how unfinished it really was.
So: less outright fabrication than Will to Power, but still shaped by editorial hands with their own agendas.
Not much outright fabrication in WM. It's mostly about selectivity and sequence. In fact Nietzsche had planned such a work (ph he would have used a different title) but ran out of gas in his final pre-collapse years
You're absolutely right, and I apologize for overstating the case. Thanks for the correction.
More Accurate Picture of Will to Power:
Nietzsche did plan a major systematic work in his late period—he experimented with various titles and outlines for it throughout the 1880s. The Will to Power represents one of those projected titles. The material Elisabeth and Peter Gast compiled came from genuine Nietzsche notebooks, not fabrications.
The problems, as you note, are indeed about selectivity and arrangement: which fragments to include, which to exclude, how to order them to create an apparent argument, and which outline scheme to follow among Nietzsche's many abandoned plans. Elisabeth's editorial choices were influenced by her nationalist politics and her desire to present a particular "systematic" Nietzsche.
The Parallel Holds Better:
So your original comparison is actually quite apt. Both texts involve:
Genuine authorial material left unfinished
Editors with ideological commitments making choices about structure
Posthumous assembly creating a "work" the authors never finalized
Later scholarly editions revealing the messy reality behind the published versions
The key question in both cases becomes: how much do editorial decisions about sequence and selection shape our understanding of the thinker's ideas? With both The German Ideology and The Will to Power, we're reading something filtered through others' interpretive lenses, even if the underlying words are authentic.
Vedic gods Boghazkoi. AI
Perplexity
Vedic gods Boghazkoi
The Boghazkoi inscription, discovered in modern-day Turkey at the ancient Hittite capital of Hattusa, references four Vedic gods from around 1400 BCE .
This treaty between the Hittites and Mitanni kingdom names Indra (In-da-ra), Varuna (U-ru-wa-na), Mitra (Mi-it-ra), and the Nasatyas or Ashvins (Na-sa-at-ya-na) as witnesses, linking early Indo-Aryan culture to Anatolia .
Historical Context
These deities match Rigvedic descriptions: Indra as the thunder-wielding warrior king, Varuna as guardian of cosmic order (ṛta), Mitra as god of contracts and friendship (often paired with Varuna), and Nasatyas as twin healer gods .
The inscription's cuneiform script shows phonetic variations typical of Indo-Aryan languages outside India, predating known Vedic texts .
Significance
This evidence supports Indo-Aryan migrations from Central Asia westward, as the gods appear in a non-Indian context centuries before the Rigveda's composition .
It challenges purely indigenous origins for Vedic religion, highlighting shared Indo-Iranian heritage with Mitanni elites . No other early epigraphy outside South Asia names this exact pantheon combination .
Vedic gods Boghazkoi
The Boghazkoi inscription, discovered in modern-day Turkey at the ancient Hittite capital of Hattusa, references four Vedic gods from around 1400 BCE .
This treaty between the Hittites and Mitanni kingdom names Indra (In-da-ra), Varuna (U-ru-wa-na), Mitra (Mi-it-ra), and the Nasatyas or Ashvins (Na-sa-at-ya-na) as witnesses, linking early Indo-Aryan culture to Anatolia .
Historical Context
These deities match Rigvedic descriptions: Indra as the thunder-wielding warrior king, Varuna as guardian of cosmic order (ṛta), Mitra as god of contracts and friendship (often paired with Varuna), and Nasatyas as twin healer gods .
The inscription's cuneiform script shows phonetic variations typical of Indo-Aryan languages outside India, predating known Vedic texts .
Significance
This evidence supports Indo-Aryan migrations from Central Asia westward, as the gods appear in a non-Indian context centuries before the Rigveda's composition .
It challenges purely indigenous origins for Vedic religion, highlighting shared Indo-Iranian heritage with Mitanni elites . No other early epigraphy outside South Asia names this exact pantheon combination .
Lactational amenorrhea. AI
Google AI
Lactational amenorrhea
Lactational amenorrhea is the temporary infertility experienced by some women during breastfeeding, a natural period of not having menstrual periods (amenorrhea) after childbirth, often used as a temporary, highly effective (over 98%) birth control method called the Lactational Amenorrhea Method (LAM) if specific strict rules are followed: exclusive breastfeeding (no formula/water), frequent feeds (day/night), and use only for the first six months postpartum, or until periods return.
How it works
Hormonal suppression: Frequent nipple stimulation from the baby's suckling releases hormones that prevent the release of eggs (ovulation) and the return of menstruation.
Rules for using LAM effectively (must meet all three)
Amenorrhea: You have not had a period (vaginal bleeding) since giving birth (not counting the first few weeks' bleeding).
Exclusive/Nearly Exclusive Breastfeeding: The baby gets only breast milk, no formula, water, or other liquids, and no pacifier use.
Frequent Feeding: Feedings are frequent, generally every 4 hours during the day and 6 hours at night.
When it stops being effective
Your period returns (even spotting).
Your baby starts getting solid foods, formula, or water.
Your baby goes longer than 4-6 hours between feeds.
The baby is over 6 months old.
When LAM ends, you should switch to another birth control method (like condoms) to prevent pregnancy. Important Note
Lactational amenorrhea
Lactational amenorrhea is the temporary infertility experienced by some women during breastfeeding, a natural period of not having menstrual periods (amenorrhea) after childbirth, often used as a temporary, highly effective (over 98%) birth control method called the Lactational Amenorrhea Method (LAM) if specific strict rules are followed: exclusive breastfeeding (no formula/water), frequent feeds (day/night), and use only for the first six months postpartum, or until periods return.
How it works
Hormonal suppression: Frequent nipple stimulation from the baby's suckling releases hormones that prevent the release of eggs (ovulation) and the return of menstruation.
Rules for using LAM effectively (must meet all three)
Amenorrhea: You have not had a period (vaginal bleeding) since giving birth (not counting the first few weeks' bleeding).
Exclusive/Nearly Exclusive Breastfeeding: The baby gets only breast milk, no formula, water, or other liquids, and no pacifier use.
Frequent Feeding: Feedings are frequent, generally every 4 hours during the day and 6 hours at night.
When it stops being effective
Your period returns (even spotting).
Your baby starts getting solid foods, formula, or water.
Your baby goes longer than 4-6 hours between feeds.
The baby is over 6 months old.
When LAM ends, you should switch to another birth control method (like condoms) to prevent pregnancy. Important Note
Post-Rome tech gains. AI
Grok
1 Despite the decline in literacy during the feudal period, numerous highly important advantages in technology occurred. Would you say that Roman Catholic influence and the Holy Roman Empire confederation stabilized society enough to account for these advances in a technological evolution seen nowhere else?
No, the Roman Catholic Church's influence and the Holy Roman Empire's confederation provided important societal stability but do not fully account for the unique technological advances in medieval Europe (roughly 500–1500 CE), nor were those advances entirely unseen elsewhere.
Literacy Decline and Context
Literacy did decline sharply after the fall of the Western Roman Empire, dropping from perhaps 20–40% in urban Roman areas to under 5–10% in much of early medieval Europe, largely confined to clergy. This reflected economic disruption, loss of urban bureaucracies, and reduced need for widespread reading/writing outside religious contexts. By the High Middle Ages (c. 1000–1300), literacy began recovering slowly, reaching 10–25% among adult males in some regions by 1500, driven by trade, universities, and vernacular texts.
Key Technological Advances
Despite this, medieval Europe saw significant practical innovations, particularly from the 10th–13th centuries:
Agriculture — Heavy moldboard plow (turning heavy northern soils), three-field crop rotation (increasing yields by 50%), and horse collars/harnesses (better animal power).
Energy and mechanics — Widespread watermills and vertical windmills (for grinding, pumping, etc.), mechanical clocks (from c. 1280).
Other — Eyeglasses (c. 1286), Gothic architecture (flying buttresses), improved blast furnaces, and adoption/refinement of gunpowder artillery.
These fueled population growth (from ~30 million in 1000 to ~80 million in 1300), urbanization, and economic expansion—what historians call a "medieval industrial revolution" in certain sectors.
Role of the Catholic Church
The Church played a positive, stabilizing role:
It preserved knowledge (monastic copying of texts).
Founded universities (Bologna 1088, Paris c. 1150) that institutionalized learning.
Supported practical innovations (e.g., clocks in monasteries for prayer schedules, cathedral-building tech).
Provided ideological encouragement for mastering nature (anthropocentric view of dominion over creation).
It was not inherently anti-innovation; many advances aligned with Church needs or occurred under its patronage.
Role of the Holy Roman Empire
The HRE (c. 800/962–1806) was a loose confederation in Central Europe, offering some political continuity and protection of Christendom but fragmented by feudal princes. It contributed less directly to tech than local lords, trade networks, or manorial systems. Stability came more from post-Viking/Carolingian recovery and feudalism's localized order than centralized imperial authority.
Broader Causes and Comparisons
The "uniqueness" is overstated. Many advances were refinements or adoptions:
Gunpowder → From China (via Mongols/Islam).
Windmills/paper/spinning wheel → Influences from Islamic/Asian worlds.
Contemporaneous civilizations often outpaced Europe in sophistication:
Song China (960–1279) → Advanced in gunpowder weapons, printing, compass navigation, steel production, and bureaucracy-supported innovation.
Islamic Golden Age (8th–13th centuries) → Led in medicine, optics, algebra, astronomy, hospitals, and preservation/expansion of classical knowledge; transmitted crops/tech to Europe via Spain/Crusades. Europe's edge lay in applying innovations practically (e.g., harnessing wind/water power extensively) amid population pressure and decentralized competition, leading to sustained growth that prefigured later divergences. Stability from the Church (cultural unity) and feudal structures (ending invasions) helped create conditions for experimentation, but demographic recovery, trade revival, and cross-cultural exchanges were equally crucial.
In summary, Church and HRE contributed to a stable framework that preserved and applied knowledge, but the advances stemmed from broader economic, demographic, and diffusive forces—not a singular "nowhere else" phenomenon. Europe's trajectory diverged more sharply post-1400.
The overall technological pace of innovation that affected society as a whole was unmatched anywhere else. In any case, what were some dates of major tech advances between Rome's fall and Gutenberg?
Here are some of the most impactful technological advances in medieval Europe between the fall of the Western Roman Empire (c. 476 CE) and Johannes Gutenberg's movable-type printing press (c. 1450). These innovations, particularly in agriculture, energy, mechanics, and construction, drove population growth, urbanization, and economic expansion from around 1000–1300 CE. Dates are approximate, as many spread gradually.
Agricultural Innovations
Three-field crop rotation (widespread by 8th–9th centuries, originating in northern Europe): Improved soil fertility and yields by ~50% compared to two-field systems, allowing more land use.
Rigid horse collar (widespread in Europe by 9th century, adapted from earlier Asian designs): Enabled horses to pull heavier loads without choking, boosting plowing speed and efficiency over oxen. Heavy moldboard plow (widespread by 9th–10th centuries in northern Europe): Turned heavy, clay-rich soils effectively, opening new fertile lands for cultivation.
Energy and Mechanical Innovations
Vertical windmill (first documented in Europe c. 1185, Yorkshire, England): Harnessed wind for grinding grain and pumping, independent of water sources.
Water mill
Medieval and Early Modern Windmill Technology brewminate.com
Mechanical clock with verge escapement (first all-mechanical clocks c. 1280–1300, in European monasteries and towers): Allowed precise timekeeping, influencing work schedules, science, and daily life.
The role of the mechanical clock in medieval science - Medievalists.net medievalists.net
The role of the mechanical clock in medieval science - Medievalists.net
Other Key Advances
Eyeglasses (convex lenses for farsightedness) (invented c. 1286, Italy): Extended productive years for scholars, artisans, and monks by correcting vision. Flying buttresses in Gothic architecture (emerged c. 1160s–1180s, e.g., in early Gothic cathedrals like Notre-Dame de Paris): Enabled taller, lighter structures with vast windows, revolutionizing building scale.
Physical Demonstration of Flying Buttresses in Gothic Cathedrals | Creative Art of Structural and Civil Engineering casce.princeton.edu
Physical Demonstration of Flying Buttresses in Gothic Cathedrals | Creative Art of Structural and Civil Engineering
Gunpowder artillery (first European cannons c. 1320s–1340s, adopted from Asian origins via Islamic world): Transformed warfare by the late period. These built cumulatively, with many peaking in the High Middle Ages (c. 1000–1300), fueling what some historians term a "medieval industrial revolution" in practical applications.
1 Despite the decline in literacy during the feudal period, numerous highly important advantages in technology occurred. Would you say that Roman Catholic influence and the Holy Roman Empire confederation stabilized society enough to account for these advances in a technological evolution seen nowhere else?
No, the Roman Catholic Church's influence and the Holy Roman Empire's confederation provided important societal stability but do not fully account for the unique technological advances in medieval Europe (roughly 500–1500 CE), nor were those advances entirely unseen elsewhere.
Literacy Decline and Context
Literacy did decline sharply after the fall of the Western Roman Empire, dropping from perhaps 20–40% in urban Roman areas to under 5–10% in much of early medieval Europe, largely confined to clergy. This reflected economic disruption, loss of urban bureaucracies, and reduced need for widespread reading/writing outside religious contexts. By the High Middle Ages (c. 1000–1300), literacy began recovering slowly, reaching 10–25% among adult males in some regions by 1500, driven by trade, universities, and vernacular texts.
Key Technological Advances
Despite this, medieval Europe saw significant practical innovations, particularly from the 10th–13th centuries:
Agriculture — Heavy moldboard plow (turning heavy northern soils), three-field crop rotation (increasing yields by 50%), and horse collars/harnesses (better animal power).
Energy and mechanics — Widespread watermills and vertical windmills (for grinding, pumping, etc.), mechanical clocks (from c. 1280).
Other — Eyeglasses (c. 1286), Gothic architecture (flying buttresses), improved blast furnaces, and adoption/refinement of gunpowder artillery.
These fueled population growth (from ~30 million in 1000 to ~80 million in 1300), urbanization, and economic expansion—what historians call a "medieval industrial revolution" in certain sectors.
Role of the Catholic Church
The Church played a positive, stabilizing role:
It preserved knowledge (monastic copying of texts).
Founded universities (Bologna 1088, Paris c. 1150) that institutionalized learning.
Supported practical innovations (e.g., clocks in monasteries for prayer schedules, cathedral-building tech).
Provided ideological encouragement for mastering nature (anthropocentric view of dominion over creation).
It was not inherently anti-innovation; many advances aligned with Church needs or occurred under its patronage.
Role of the Holy Roman Empire
The HRE (c. 800/962–1806) was a loose confederation in Central Europe, offering some political continuity and protection of Christendom but fragmented by feudal princes. It contributed less directly to tech than local lords, trade networks, or manorial systems. Stability came more from post-Viking/Carolingian recovery and feudalism's localized order than centralized imperial authority.
Broader Causes and Comparisons
The "uniqueness" is overstated. Many advances were refinements or adoptions:
Gunpowder → From China (via Mongols/Islam).
Windmills/paper/spinning wheel → Influences from Islamic/Asian worlds.
Contemporaneous civilizations often outpaced Europe in sophistication:
Song China (960–1279) → Advanced in gunpowder weapons, printing, compass navigation, steel production, and bureaucracy-supported innovation.
Islamic Golden Age (8th–13th centuries) → Led in medicine, optics, algebra, astronomy, hospitals, and preservation/expansion of classical knowledge; transmitted crops/tech to Europe via Spain/Crusades. Europe's edge lay in applying innovations practically (e.g., harnessing wind/water power extensively) amid population pressure and decentralized competition, leading to sustained growth that prefigured later divergences. Stability from the Church (cultural unity) and feudal structures (ending invasions) helped create conditions for experimentation, but demographic recovery, trade revival, and cross-cultural exchanges were equally crucial.
In summary, Church and HRE contributed to a stable framework that preserved and applied knowledge, but the advances stemmed from broader economic, demographic, and diffusive forces—not a singular "nowhere else" phenomenon. Europe's trajectory diverged more sharply post-1400.
The overall technological pace of innovation that affected society as a whole was unmatched anywhere else. In any case, what were some dates of major tech advances between Rome's fall and Gutenberg?
Here are some of the most impactful technological advances in medieval Europe between the fall of the Western Roman Empire (c. 476 CE) and Johannes Gutenberg's movable-type printing press (c. 1450). These innovations, particularly in agriculture, energy, mechanics, and construction, drove population growth, urbanization, and economic expansion from around 1000–1300 CE. Dates are approximate, as many spread gradually.
Agricultural Innovations
Three-field crop rotation (widespread by 8th–9th centuries, originating in northern Europe): Improved soil fertility and yields by ~50% compared to two-field systems, allowing more land use.
Rigid horse collar (widespread in Europe by 9th century, adapted from earlier Asian designs): Enabled horses to pull heavier loads without choking, boosting plowing speed and efficiency over oxen. Heavy moldboard plow (widespread by 9th–10th centuries in northern Europe): Turned heavy, clay-rich soils effectively, opening new fertile lands for cultivation.
Energy and Mechanical Innovations
Vertical windmill (first documented in Europe c. 1185, Yorkshire, England): Harnessed wind for grinding grain and pumping, independent of water sources.
Water mill
Medieval and Early Modern Windmill Technology brewminate.com
Mechanical clock with verge escapement (first all-mechanical clocks c. 1280–1300, in European monasteries and towers): Allowed precise timekeeping, influencing work schedules, science, and daily life.
The role of the mechanical clock in medieval science - Medievalists.net medievalists.net
The role of the mechanical clock in medieval science - Medievalists.net
Other Key Advances
Eyeglasses (convex lenses for farsightedness) (invented c. 1286, Italy): Extended productive years for scholars, artisans, and monks by correcting vision. Flying buttresses in Gothic architecture (emerged c. 1160s–1180s, e.g., in early Gothic cathedrals like Notre-Dame de Paris): Enabled taller, lighter structures with vast windows, revolutionizing building scale.
Physical Demonstration of Flying Buttresses in Gothic Cathedrals | Creative Art of Structural and Civil Engineering casce.princeton.edu
Physical Demonstration of Flying Buttresses in Gothic Cathedrals | Creative Art of Structural and Civil Engineering
Gunpowder artillery (first European cannons c. 1320s–1340s, adopted from Asian origins via Islamic world): Transformed warfare by the late period. These built cumulatively, with many peaking in the High Middle Ages (c. 1000–1300), fueling what some historians term a "medieval industrial revolution" in practical applications.
Trib spellings. AI
Grok
Link to old Chicago tribune orthography, including spellings like thru
The Chicago Tribune adopted simplified (or "reformed") spellings as part of a long-running campaign for English spelling reform, influenced by movements like the Simplified Spelling Board (backed by figures such as Andrew Carnegie and Theodore Roosevelt). This practice began in the late 19th century under publisher Joseph Medill and expanded significantly from 1934 to 1975 under publisher Robert R. McCormick, who introduced around 80 reformed words (e.g., "tho" for though, "thru" for through, "altho" for although, "thoro" for thorough, "frate" for freight, "hocky" for hockey, "burocrat" for bureaucrat, "catalog" for catalogue, and others like "agast," "iland," "rime").
The newspaper gradually scaled back the list over time, retaining some (like "-og" endings: dialog, epilog) and fully abandoning most—including "thru" and "tho"—in 1975, as announced in an editorial titled something along the lines of "Thru is through."
Key resources with details on the Tribune's orthography and the broader history:
Wikipedia: English-language spelling reform (section on U.S. efforts and the Chicago Tribune) — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English-language_spelling_reform
Detailed historical overview from the Simplified Spelling Society (PDF): Chicago Tribune's spelling reforms — https://www.spellingsociety.org/uploaded_media/tribune-media.pdf
New York Times article (1975) on the end of the practice: "‘Thru’ Is Through As Chicago Tribune Ends Spelling Fight" — https://www.nytimes.com/1975/09/30/archives/thru-is-through-as-chicago-tribune-ends-spelling-fight.html
Columbia Journalism Review: "Why you will never spell anything correctly" (discusses the Tribune's role) — https://www.cjr.org/language_corner/orthography.php
Note: This is distinct from the Chicago Manual of Style (published by the University of Chicago Press), which has never advocated simplified spellings and follows standard dictionaries like Merriam-Webster.
You don't have a link to the Tribune's actual list of revised spellings from the 1930s and 1940s?
No, there isn't a single publicly available primary source link to the Chicago Tribune's official full list of revised spellings as announced in the 1930s–1940s (the initial 80-word batch introduced in early 1934, later adjusted). The changes were rolled out gradually via editorials and internal style guidelines under publisher Robert R. McCormick, rat https://www.spellingsociety.org/uploaded_media/tribune-media.pdfher than as one comprehensive published roster.
The most detailed historical resource is this PDF from the Simplified Spelling Society (now the English Spelling Society), which compiles research on the Tribune's reforms, including timelines, examples, and context:
https://www.spellingsociety.org/uploaded_media/tribune-media.pdf
It draws from archives and secondary sources but doesn't reproduce a verbatim "master list" from the paper itself.
Secondary sources (like Wikipedia's English-language spelling reform page and various articles) consistently cite the initial 1934 introductions including words like:
agast (aghast)
burocrat (bureaucrat)
frate (freight)
harth (hearth)
herse (hearse)
iland (island)
rime (rhyme)
staf (staff)
telegraf (telegraph)
By 1939, unpopular ones (e.g., crum for crumb, sherif for sheriff) were dropped, and prominent additions included tho, altho, thoro, thru (and derivatives). Later tweaks in the 1940s–1950s added things like frate/frater, and "ph" to "f" changes (e.g., autograf, philosofy, sofomore).
The list fluctuated over decades (peaking around 80, reduced over time), and most were abandoned by 1975 except some "-og" endings (dialog, catalog, etc., which became standard American variants anyway).
If you're looking for primary evidence, archived Tribune issues from 1934 (via ProQuest Historical Newspapers or similar library databases) would show the changes in use, but no single "official list" article seems to exist online.
There must be at least a pretty good approximate list out there
Yes, while no single "official" exhaustive master list from the Chicago Tribune itself is publicly digitized or widely reproduced (the changes were introduced gradually via editorials and internal stylebooks rather than one big announcement), researchers and historians have compiled pretty comprehensive approximate lists based on Tribune archives, style manuals, and contemporary reports.
The most detailed and reliable reconstruction comes from scholarly articles in the Journal of the Simplified Spelling Society (now English Spelling Society), particularly John B. Shipley's multi-part series "Spelling the Chicago ‘Tribune’ Way, 1934–1975." These draw from Tribune stylebooks (e.g., 1953, 1958) and announcements.
Initial 1934 Introductions (around 80 words, rolled out over two months)
Early batches included removals of silent letters, shortening "-gue" endings, and phonetic adjustments. Common examples:
advertisment → advertisement
agast → aghast
burocrat/burocracy → bureaucrat/bureaucracy
crum → crumb
frate → freight
harth → hearth
herse → hearse
hocky → hockey
iland → island
jocky → jockey
missil → missile
rime → rhyme
staf → staff
telegraf → telegraph
Many others in this wave focused on "-og" endings (e.g., catalog, dialog, prolog) and dropped silent letters.
Adjustments in 1939
Unpopular ones dropped (e.g., crum, sherif → sheriff), list reduced, but prominent additions:
altho → although
tho → though
thoro → thorough
thru → through
(and derivatives like thruout → throughout, thorofare → thoroughfare) This brought the active list to around 40.
1940s–1950s Additions
frate/frater → freight/freighter (1945)
"ph" to "f" in non-initial positions (1949): autograf → autograph, philosofy → philosophy, photograf → photograph, sofomore → sophomore, telegraf → telegraph
Others added sporadically: aging (from ageing), cantaloup → cantaloupe, hiccup, sodder → solder, tarif → tariff, tranquility
Peak usage was around 80 in the 1930s–1940s, reduced to ~60 by mid-1950s, and further trimmed post-McCormick's 1955 death.
Retained Until 1975 (or longer)
The most famous and longest-lasting:
altho, tho, thoro, thru (and variants)
-og endings: catalog, dialog, epilog, pedagog, prolog, synagog (these became common American variants anyway)
Some others like canceled (single l), drouth → drought, skilful → skillful
By 1970, a stylebook update dropped many (e.g., clew → clue, frate, sodder, tarif). In 1975, most were abandoned except -og forms, with the editorial "Thru is through and so is tho."
For the closest to a full historical list, check the English Spelling Society's resources, including Shipley's articles and this overview PDF: https://www.spellingsociety.org/uploaded_media/tribune-media.pdf (it timelines changes with many examples). Secondary sources like Wikipedia's spelling reform page aggregate similar compilations from these studies.
This was never a fixed, rigid set—it evolved based on reader feedback and editorial decisions—but the above covers the vast majority cited across reliable sources.
50 most favored Chicago Trib nu stile spellings
The Chicago Tribune's "new style" (simplified or reformed) spellings were never a fixed set of exactly 50, but rather an evolving list that started with around 80 words in 1934, peaked there, then gradually reduced based on reader feedback, editorial decisions, and practicality. The most favored ones — meaning the longest-lasting, most prominently used, and least controversial (many retained for decades until 1975 or beyond) — centered on a core group of about 40–60 during the peak years (1940s–1950s).
Here is a compilation of the 50 most commonly cited and favored Tribune-style spellings from historical sources (including scholarly reconstructions by researchers like John B. Shipley, Kenneth Ives, and the English Spelling Society). These were the ones most consistently used, defended in editorials, or retained longest (e.g., the iconic "thru/tho" family and "-og" endings). I've prioritized longevity and prominence, with approximate dates of active use where known:
[See list on separate page]
These represent the "most favored" based on frequency in Tribune archives, longevity (many "th-" and "-og" words lasted until the 1975 abandonment), and mentions in historical accounts. Less favored early ones (e.g., crum for crumb, sherif for sheriff) were quickly dropped in 1939. The "-og" endings and some single-L forms became widely accepted American variants anyway. For deeper details, John B. Shipley's articles in the Journal of the Simplified Spelling Society provide the most exhaustive analysis from Tribune stylebooks.
Link to old Chicago tribune orthography, including spellings like thru
The Chicago Tribune adopted simplified (or "reformed") spellings as part of a long-running campaign for English spelling reform, influenced by movements like the Simplified Spelling Board (backed by figures such as Andrew Carnegie and Theodore Roosevelt). This practice began in the late 19th century under publisher Joseph Medill and expanded significantly from 1934 to 1975 under publisher Robert R. McCormick, who introduced around 80 reformed words (e.g., "tho" for though, "thru" for through, "altho" for although, "thoro" for thorough, "frate" for freight, "hocky" for hockey, "burocrat" for bureaucrat, "catalog" for catalogue, and others like "agast," "iland," "rime").
The newspaper gradually scaled back the list over time, retaining some (like "-og" endings: dialog, epilog) and fully abandoning most—including "thru" and "tho"—in 1975, as announced in an editorial titled something along the lines of "Thru is through."
Key resources with details on the Tribune's orthography and the broader history:
Wikipedia: English-language spelling reform (section on U.S. efforts and the Chicago Tribune) — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English-language_spelling_reform
Detailed historical overview from the Simplified Spelling Society (PDF): Chicago Tribune's spelling reforms — https://www.spellingsociety.org/uploaded_media/tribune-media.pdf
New York Times article (1975) on the end of the practice: "‘Thru’ Is Through As Chicago Tribune Ends Spelling Fight" — https://www.nytimes.com/1975/09/30/archives/thru-is-through-as-chicago-tribune-ends-spelling-fight.html
Columbia Journalism Review: "Why you will never spell anything correctly" (discusses the Tribune's role) — https://www.cjr.org/language_corner/orthography.php
Note: This is distinct from the Chicago Manual of Style (published by the University of Chicago Press), which has never advocated simplified spellings and follows standard dictionaries like Merriam-Webster.
You don't have a link to the Tribune's actual list of revised spellings from the 1930s and 1940s?
No, there isn't a single publicly available primary source link to the Chicago Tribune's official full list of revised spellings as announced in the 1930s–1940s (the initial 80-word batch introduced in early 1934, later adjusted). The changes were rolled out gradually via editorials and internal style guidelines under publisher Robert R. McCormick, rat https://www.spellingsociety.org/uploaded_media/tribune-media.pdfher than as one comprehensive published roster.
The most detailed historical resource is this PDF from the Simplified Spelling Society (now the English Spelling Society), which compiles research on the Tribune's reforms, including timelines, examples, and context:
https://www.spellingsociety.org/uploaded_media/tribune-media.pdf
It draws from archives and secondary sources but doesn't reproduce a verbatim "master list" from the paper itself.
Secondary sources (like Wikipedia's English-language spelling reform page and various articles) consistently cite the initial 1934 introductions including words like:
agast (aghast)
burocrat (bureaucrat)
frate (freight)
harth (hearth)
herse (hearse)
iland (island)
rime (rhyme)
staf (staff)
telegraf (telegraph)
By 1939, unpopular ones (e.g., crum for crumb, sherif for sheriff) were dropped, and prominent additions included tho, altho, thoro, thru (and derivatives). Later tweaks in the 1940s–1950s added things like frate/frater, and "ph" to "f" changes (e.g., autograf, philosofy, sofomore).
The list fluctuated over decades (peaking around 80, reduced over time), and most were abandoned by 1975 except some "-og" endings (dialog, catalog, etc., which became standard American variants anyway).
If you're looking for primary evidence, archived Tribune issues from 1934 (via ProQuest Historical Newspapers or similar library databases) would show the changes in use, but no single "official list" article seems to exist online.
There must be at least a pretty good approximate list out there
Yes, while no single "official" exhaustive master list from the Chicago Tribune itself is publicly digitized or widely reproduced (the changes were introduced gradually via editorials and internal stylebooks rather than one big announcement), researchers and historians have compiled pretty comprehensive approximate lists based on Tribune archives, style manuals, and contemporary reports.
The most detailed and reliable reconstruction comes from scholarly articles in the Journal of the Simplified Spelling Society (now English Spelling Society), particularly John B. Shipley's multi-part series "Spelling the Chicago ‘Tribune’ Way, 1934–1975." These draw from Tribune stylebooks (e.g., 1953, 1958) and announcements.
Initial 1934 Introductions (around 80 words, rolled out over two months)
Early batches included removals of silent letters, shortening "-gue" endings, and phonetic adjustments. Common examples:
advertisment → advertisement
agast → aghast
burocrat/burocracy → bureaucrat/bureaucracy
crum → crumb
frate → freight
harth → hearth
herse → hearse
hocky → hockey
iland → island
jocky → jockey
missil → missile
rime → rhyme
staf → staff
telegraf → telegraph
Many others in this wave focused on "-og" endings (e.g., catalog, dialog, prolog) and dropped silent letters.
Adjustments in 1939
Unpopular ones dropped (e.g., crum, sherif → sheriff), list reduced, but prominent additions:
altho → although
tho → though
thoro → thorough
thru → through
(and derivatives like thruout → throughout, thorofare → thoroughfare) This brought the active list to around 40.
1940s–1950s Additions
frate/frater → freight/freighter (1945)
"ph" to "f" in non-initial positions (1949): autograf → autograph, philosofy → philosophy, photograf → photograph, sofomore → sophomore, telegraf → telegraph
Others added sporadically: aging (from ageing), cantaloup → cantaloupe, hiccup, sodder → solder, tarif → tariff, tranquility
Peak usage was around 80 in the 1930s–1940s, reduced to ~60 by mid-1950s, and further trimmed post-McCormick's 1955 death.
Retained Until 1975 (or longer)
The most famous and longest-lasting:
altho, tho, thoro, thru (and variants)
-og endings: catalog, dialog, epilog, pedagog, prolog, synagog (these became common American variants anyway)
Some others like canceled (single l), drouth → drought, skilful → skillful
By 1970, a stylebook update dropped many (e.g., clew → clue, frate, sodder, tarif). In 1975, most were abandoned except -og forms, with the editorial "Thru is through and so is tho."
For the closest to a full historical list, check the English Spelling Society's resources, including Shipley's articles and this overview PDF: https://www.spellingsociety.org/uploaded_media/tribune-media.pdf (it timelines changes with many examples). Secondary sources like Wikipedia's spelling reform page aggregate similar compilations from these studies.
This was never a fixed, rigid set—it evolved based on reader feedback and editorial decisions—but the above covers the vast majority cited across reliable sources.
50 most favored Chicago Trib nu stile spellings
The Chicago Tribune's "new style" (simplified or reformed) spellings were never a fixed set of exactly 50, but rather an evolving list that started with around 80 words in 1934, peaked there, then gradually reduced based on reader feedback, editorial decisions, and practicality. The most favored ones — meaning the longest-lasting, most prominently used, and least controversial (many retained for decades until 1975 or beyond) — centered on a core group of about 40–60 during the peak years (1940s–1950s).
Here is a compilation of the 50 most commonly cited and favored Tribune-style spellings from historical sources (including scholarly reconstructions by researchers like John B. Shipley, Kenneth Ives, and the English Spelling Society). These were the ones most consistently used, defended in editorials, or retained longest (e.g., the iconic "thru/tho" family and "-og" endings). I've prioritized longevity and prominence, with approximate dates of active use where known:
[See list on separate page]
These represent the "most favored" based on frequency in Tribune archives, longevity (many "th-" and "-og" words lasted until the 1975 abandonment), and mentions in historical accounts. Less favored early ones (e.g., crum for crumb, sherif for sheriff) were quickly dropped in 1939. The "-og" endings and some single-L forms became widely accepted American variants anyway. For deeper details, John B. Shipley's articles in the Journal of the Simplified Spelling Society provide the most exhaustive analysis from Tribune stylebooks.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
-
Take heed: Any information provided by AI below should be checked. Push for digital bill of rights https://youtu.be/HYOeBFoJjpk?si=7XFpU...
-
I've got sunshine, on a cloudy day When it's cold outside, I've got the month of May (ooh) I guess you'd say What can m...
-
I reprint this because I just saw a video on AES strong encryption, which is the same thing. Video link is at bottom of page.
