<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Tom Graves / Tetradian &#187; English</title>
	<atom:link href="http://weblog.tetradian.com/tag/english/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://weblog.tetradian.com</link>
	<description>Random ramblings over the metaphoric edge</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 16:57:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>The organization of the Organization</title>
		<link>http://weblog.tetradian.com/2010/02/20/the-organization-of-the-organization/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-organization-of-the-organization</link>
		<comments>http://weblog.tetradian.com/2010/02/20/the-organization-of-the-organization/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 16:56:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tom G</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scribbles / writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[English]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[language]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[organisation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[organization]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://weblog.tomgraves.org/?p=626</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Had an interesting question come in today from one of my Dutch colleagues, Bas van Gils: I have to write a document and I&#8217;m kinda stuck. Time to ask for some help I&#8217;d say The issue with the document is that I want to make a distinction between &#8216;the organization as in: &#8220;the way in which [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Had an interesting question come in today from one of my Dutch colleagues, <strong><a title="Bas van Gils on Twitter" href="http://twitter.com/basvg" target="_blank">Bas van Gils</a></strong>:</p>
<blockquote><p>I have to write a document and I&#8217;m kinda stuck. Time to ask for some help I&#8217;d say  <img src='http://weblog.tetradian.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>The issue with the document is that I want to make a distinction between &#8216;the organization as in: &#8220;the way in which some system / department / enterprise is organized&#8221; and &#8220;the organization as in: the legal entity&#8221;. I&#8217;ve had this issue before and I can&#8217;t figure out how to deal with this properly in documents. It just feels awkward to say Organization (with capital) for meaning one and organization (without) for meaning two&#8230;</p>
<p>Any thoughts?</p></blockquote>
<p>This is a real doozy of a problem that really shows up the limitations of English as a language. It&#8217;s  hard enough for native English speakers to resolve, let alone those who only use English as a business-language&#8230;</p>
<p>I ain&#8217;t no linguistics specialist, but as I see it, the respective contexts for the two meanings are as follows:</p>
<ul>
<li>Meaning 1 (&#8216;the way something is organized&#8217;): a nounal expression of the verb &#8216;to organize&#8217;, moving from the present-participle (&#8216;organizing&#8217;) to the adjectival past-participle (&#8216;organized&#8217;) to the verb-as-condition (&#8216;organization&#8217;) [there'll be a proper linguistic term for this nounal form, but I haven't a clue what it is <img src='http://weblog.tetradian.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' />  ]</li>
<li>Meaning 2 (&#8216;the legal entity&#8217;): a label for an abstract entity that is structured (&#8216;organized&#8217;) in some defined way</li>
</ul>
<p>To me, Meaning 1 is still more related to the verb, a temporary condition of something dynamic (&#8220;the act of organizing&#8221;), whereas Meaning 2 is definitely a noun, something static. In Meaning 1, the structure could change &#8211; the outcome of a &#8216;reorganization&#8217; &#8211; and it would still be &#8216;organization&#8217;; whereas Meaning 2 is defined and delimited by its legal boundaries, so if those were to change, the previous &#8216;the organization&#8217; would cease to exist.</p>
<p>[A quick check at <a title="AudioEnglish.net: definition of 'organization'" href="http://www.audioenglish.net/dictionary/organization.htm" target="_blank">AudioEnglish.net</a> throws up a total of seven meanings: Bas's 'Meaning 1' is somewhere between their 1 ("a group of people who work together") and 2 ("an organized structure for arranging or classifying"), whereas Bas's 'Meaning 2' is probably closest to their 3 ("the persons or committees or departments etc who make up a body for the purpose of administering something"). The built-in thesaurus in MS Word isn't much help, either. Overall, it's all too obvious that English is a confusing mess. <img src='http://weblog.tetradian.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':-(' class='wp-smiley' />  ]</p>
<p>I would probably try to juggle the phrasing so that I can avoid having to put the two meanings together in the same sentence, but I can see plenty of circumstances in which there&#8217;s no way to get round it.</p>
<p>If I <em>did</em> have to use both meanings in the same sentence, without any other option, I might well use Bas&#8217;s capitalisation kludge, though I would capitalise Meaning 2 rather than Meaning 1: &#8220;the organization of the Organization&#8221;. But as Bas says, it&#8217;s awkward and ugly: and whilst, to a native English speaker, the alternative uncapitalised &#8220;the organization of the organization&#8221; would probably be clear enough, it might not make sense to native speakers of other languages.</p>
<p>But as Bas again indicates, it gets messy when we try to distinguish the two meanings once we&#8217;ve bundled them together. And going back to the present-participle &#8211; &#8220;the organizing of the organisation&#8221; &#8211; is probably uglier still, although technically correct in English.</p>
<p>So the short answer is that I don&#8217;t see any easy way round this one. Sorry&#8230; <img src='http://weblog.tetradian.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':-(' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Anyone else have any better suggestions?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://weblog.tetradian.com/2010/02/20/the-organization-of-the-organization/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

