Newsgroup: it.cultura.linguistica.inglese
Titolo: Dubbi sul plurale

Ciao a tutti,
mi e' venuto un dubbio sulla formazione del plurale di alcune parole o
espressioni. 
Come traduco "applicazioni automobilistiche"? "Automotive application"
oppure "Automotive applicationS"? 
Come traduco "automazioni"? Forse "automationS" oppure e' una di quelle
parole che rimangono invariate al plurale tipo "information"?
Grazie dell'attenzione!
-- 
questo articolo e` stato inviato via web dal servizio gratuito 
http://www.newsland.it/news
 segnala gli abusi ad 
ab...@newsland.it

 parole che rimangono invariate al plurale tipo "information"?
I wasn't sure weather automation is and uncountable noun so I did a quick 
search for it on the internet and in dictionaries. The results were 
inconclusive.
My version of the OED does not list automation.
My version of Webster's does not identify the plural for automation.
Wiktionary, a relatively unreliable source, identifies the word as 
uncountable. Wiktionary even goes so far as to identify the etymology as 
coined from automatic by a leader at Ford Motor Company in the 1940's. 
That's a fun image that I hope doesn't get lodged into my brain as a fact.
A Google search identifies 845,000 instances of automations on the web. An 
examination of the 
thefreedictionary.com
 result is actually a redirection to 
automation from automations. A search for automations on the page identifies 
several references in periodicals that are actually misspellings of 
automatons. The other 844,999 instances appear at first glance to be from 
well-meaning entrepreneurs, some who actually use the countable version in 
their company names. I suppose that means the writing is on the wall and 
that the countable automation is in widespread use.
If I were to rely on my ear, here is what I would write.
Both the robotic and process automations resulted in efficiency 
improvements.
Actually, I'd probably write the following to avoid the issue entirely.
Both the robotic automation and process automation resulted in efficiency 
improvements.
Then I'd look at it, frown, and rewrite it as the following.
Both the robotic and process automation initiatives resulted in efficiency 
improvements.

 I wasn't sure weather automation is and uncountable noun 
It is, according to the Cambridge.
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=5014&dict=CALD

 
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=5014&dict=CALD
I'd be willing to conform to that if I saw a preponderance of the 
uncountable plural version in examples of its use. However, 845,000 examples 
of 'automations' may put that status in jeopardy. Until there appears to be 
some consensus, I'd avoid it.
I would not accept "literally" to mean "virtually" no matter how many 
dictionaries describe that usage, but I would accept "automations" as the 
plural of "automation" if the widespread usage were documented in 
dictionaries. I'd also accept "automation" as an uncountable plural if there 
were a consensus in dictionary citings. 

 845,000 examples of 'automations'
Hmm... 
On the UK sites, 6.850 automations' vs. 2.720.000 occurrences of
'automation'.  I daresay the non-U usage is rare, if possible at all.

 I daresay the non-U usage is rare,
Or, better, "not so common".

 'automation'.  I daresay the non-U usage is rare, if possible at all.
I don't intend to challenge the fact that "automations" may not be used in
the UK, but your method doesn't really point to much, because the 2,720,000
instances include use in the singular, which is a much more common use of
the word. An internet-wide search for "automation" results in 94,200,000
instances. The total tally for automations vs all usages of automation
(plural and singular) is 0.25% UK and 0.89% Internet-wide. I still would be
interested in seeing examples of the use of the plural 'automation' in
periodicals. Does anyone out there have nothing better to do?
The use of "automation" as a descriptor for the general field isn't an
issue, as in "Applied and theoretical issues in robotics and automation."
But, how is it actually used by the public when one writes about multiple 
specific examples, in the plural?

 writes about multiple specific examples, in the plural?
I cannot concoct a google search that throws up such usages and only (or 
even mostly) such usages. If I google for "automations" the first few pages 
appear to be companies that chose to call themselves "<Something> 
Automations". Company names break the rules ... actually I suspect that in 
many cases that's a requirement!
The bulk of the rest (before I did find something better to do :-)) were 
talking about "automations" in Cubase. So Cubase has come up with something 
that it calls an automation and if you have more than one of them ... So 
that's clearly something else.
I cannot easily come up with an example where "automations" (in the 
original sense) could not be replaced by "automation". For that reason 
alone I'd tend to treat it as uncountable for now. Maybe things will change 
when the public actually do start to talk about it ... in my experience, 
given the slightest excuse, they'll skirt around anything remotely 
technical!
Antonio


Perhaps you would say, as per my example,
"Both the robotic and process automation resulted in efficiency
improvements."
instead of,
"Both the robotic and process automations resulted in efficiency
improvements."
I don't have an argument with that choice. My point is that it isn't clear
that automation really is considered uncountable by definitive sources.
Enrico cited that the Cambridge dictionary identified the plural as
"automation," which is strong evidence. I cited that the Wiktionary
dictionary identified the plural as "automation," which is very weak
evidence. However, I couldn't find another major dictionary to uphold the
Cambridge perspective.
MSN Encarta, for example, offers both "automation" and "automations" as the
plural.
http://au.encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861694664/automation.html
That's the Austrailian version. What the hell does that say about the
argument? I'm not sure.
Okay, here's the nondenominational English version of MSN Encarta, and they
list the plural only as "automations"
http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861587874/automation.html
This English proofreading example, avoids the issue by suggesting you
rewrite the sentence into the singular.
http://www.englishproofreading.ca/humans.htm
That is my usual solution when confronted by such a dilemma.
The site 
glossary.com
 unabashedly refers to automations in the glossary for
atmostea. What is/are atmostea? I haven't a clue.
http://www.glossary.com/glossary.php?q=Atmostea
The site 
puzzlers.org
 lists "automations" in a list of words to help puzzle
solvers.
http://www.puzzlers.org/pub/wordlists/ukacdasc.txt
I hope all this provides a clear answer to birkof02's original inquiry. If
not, the answer is to avoid the plural, or take a stand with one or the
other version of the plural and defend it to the death.

 other version of the plural and defend it to the death.


 have suggested. ;-)
Ti segnalo anche due metarisorse:
www.onelook.com
 per ricercare contemporaneamente una parola su più
dizionari,
http://www.lillathedog.net/icling/mirrordiz.html
 con un elenco di
dizionari, glossari specialistici e risorse suggerite dai
partecipanti di Icling

 writes about multiple specific examples, in the plural?
That's a good point and I don't have a definitive answer either.
Perhaps "automations" is more widespread in some specific usage...?
That's not unusual for otherwise "U" words. Think of "milks" for
instance. "Milk" is usually considered "U", still it's countable in
some informal usage when speaking of individual servings of milk, and
it's also countable in formal usage to designate different kinds of
milk. AFAIK.

 wrote in message
news:xn0fva78...@news.lillathedog.net...

The BNC contains only one use of "automations", and that is in the name of a
company, but there are 377 uses of "automation".
http://sara.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/cgi-bin/saraWeb?qy=automation
Automation is a very generic term, unlike robotics, which is a specific
field. Robotics helps in the automation of a factory, and is a field of
study.
Automations as an adjective rather than a noun ("he's the automations expert
in our office") is used, even if technically incorrect. We feel compelled to
put it in the same class as "robotics".
There is no ambiguity choosing between "automation" and "automations", but
there is no choice when using "robotic" and "robotics". "He's the robotic
man  in our office" is not the same as "He's the robotics man in our
office". One is a zombie, and the other is a mechanical genius.
Joe from Massachusetts