Re: Functionalities vs Functionality

Subject: Re: Functionalities vs Functionality
From: Jim Purcell <jimpur -at- MICROSOFT -dot- COM>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 11:05:48 -0800

Ana Maria Gallo writes:

> >As Saglieri might have said: it has too many syllables. And I agree.
> Why
> >use functionality or functionalities when function is all that is
> >needed?
>
> This solution is perfectly serviceable, as long as you're writing for
> end users. For a programming audience, "function" has a specialized
> meaning, which is why the back-formation "functionality" got coined in
> the first place.
>
> "Functionality" is collective--a program's functionality comprises all
> its functions and features. There's never a need for a plural.
>
> Jim Purcell
> jimpur -at- microsoft -dot- com
> My opinions, not Microsoft's

TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/ or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html


Previous by Author: Re: Stylish Microsoft
Next by Author: Writing for a living
Previous by Thread: Re: Functionalities vs Functionality
Next by Thread: Proofreading


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads