On Nov 28, 10:55 am, "bri...@wsu.edu" <bri...@wsu.edu> wrote:
> What do you think of the expression "accumulative total" rather than
> the more common "cumulative total"?
[quoted text clipped - 45 lines]
> OED entry for "cumulative" and found it to be slightly older than
> "accumulative."
That's common, isn't it? The obsolete or obsolescent form sounds
older even if it isn't.
> The definitions for "accumulative" and "cumulative" in Merriam-Webster
> would seem to indicate the second word is standard in phrases like
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> thinking they are old-fashioned? overly formal? mistaken? pretentious?
> hyper-correct? or just using a variant but legitimate spelling?
Redundant? Aren't all totals cumulative?
As the OED says, "cumulative" only has the first sense. If I saw
"accumulative" used in that sense, I'd suspect some kind of
affectation, though for all I know it's normal in some dialect.
"Accumulative" works for me in the other senses.
--
Jerry Friedman
Roland Hutchinson - 29 Nov 2007 05:26 GMT
> Redundant? Aren't all totals cumulative?
>
> As the OED says, "cumulative" only has the first sense. If I saw
> "accumulative" used in that sense, I'd suspect some kind of
> affectation, though for all I know it's normal in some dialect.
> "Accumulative" works for me in the other senses.
One wonders, aloud, why certain computer architectures got "accumulators"
rather then "cumulators".

Signature
Roland Hutchinson Will play viola da gamba for food.
NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to
remove spam. If your message looks like spam I may not see it.
Eric Schwartz - 29 Nov 2007 21:02 GMT
> One wonders, aloud, why certain computer architectures got "accumulators"
> rather then "cumulators".
That's what you get for letting hardware people name things, instead
of hiring a bunch of English majors to tell them what it really ought
to be called.
-=Eric
Donna Richoux - 29 Nov 2007 09:33 GMT
> On Nov 28, 10:55 am, "bri...@wsu.edu" <bri...@wsu.edu> wrote:
[snip OED, etc]
> > The definitions for "accumulative" and "cumulative" in Merriam-Webster
> > would seem to indicate the second word is standard in phrases like
> > "cumulative total."
> >
> > So when you see someone writing "accumulative total"
I don't remember ever noticing it. It's subtle, since "to accumulate" is
common. I suppose your people are writing "an accumulative total"?
> >do you react by
> > thinking they are old-fashioned? overly formal? mistaken? pretentious?
> > hyper-correct? or just using a variant but legitimate spelling?
I would assume some sort of geographical/traditional variant like
"orient/orientate," "preventive/preventative."
> Redundant? Aren't all totals cumulative?
I don't think so. I assume a "cumulative total" is what I'd think of as
a "running total," something going back in time to add up relevant
values, as opposed to simply adding up the numbers in front of one. A
total for October, and a cumulative total for Jan. - October.

Signature
Best -- Donna Richoux
> What do you think of the expression "accumulative total" rather than
> the more common "cumulative total"?
[quoted text clipped - 55 lines]
>
> Paul Brians
I would have simply made up a definition, based on the prefixes ac- and ad-,
and the context.
Jim
> What do you think of the expression "accumulative total" rather than
> the more common "cumulative total"?
It is a vulgar error, typically used by people who
believe longer words outshine shorter ones.

Signature
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)