[Elecraft] Prosign confusion (was: Anticipating Morse)

[N2EY at aol.com]

In a message dated 1/12/06 1:18:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
rondec at easystreet.com writes:


> Jim, N2EY wrote:
> 
> (CQ is) a two-letter abbreviation like QRZ.
> 
> --------------------------
> 
> But neither of them are abbreviations (i.e. shortened words). 

An abbreviation isn't always a shortened word - how did we get "lb" as an 
abbreviation for "pound"? 

> In commercial use, CQ was employed from the earliest days of public message
> handling. It is true that Marconi's stations were not "public" but private,
> talking only to other Marconi stations except in time of emergency. After
> other radio services came about in competition with Marconi, CQ was used as
> a general call to ANY other station who wished to contact them. In that case
> it was for the purpose of announcing their availability to ships who wanted
> to send messages. 

Of course - but did it start with Marconi, or was it adapted from landwire 
use?


As you know, the coastal stations open for traffic would
> 
> sent out a constant CQ call using their "wheel" (For others, the wheel was a
> mechanical disk with notches around the edge that rotated at a fixed speed.
> Contacts followed the notches to key the transmitter and send CW
> automatically). Interspersed with the CQ was a listing of the frequencies on
> which they were listening for anyone who wanted to call them. 
> 

Exactly! 


> I agree about 'keeping the flame alive' and the ease of signals like "ES"
> for "and". I am also very much aware of how hard the French struggle to keep
> the French language pure. I suspect they, among all the "western nations" at
> least, are the most dedicated to maintaining the purity of their language.
> Yet, common usage keeps creeping in with newly-adopted words and syntax. In
> our case with Morse or "CW", ES became popular because it was easy and
> useful. We don't hear parenthesis or asterisks on the CW bands much because
> they aren't as useful in our casual QSO's.

"ES" for "and" goes back a long way, though. I found references to it in QSTs 
of the 1950s, and it was used as if everyone would know what it meant. (I saw 
it in the bug-practice sentence "SHE IS 55 ES SHE IS HIS SISTER". Try sending 
*that* ten times, fast, with no mistakes!)

> 
> I applaud efforts to preserve CW, but, like any language, what is the "pure
> form"?

Ultimately, it's what the keepers of the flame say it is...;-)


 I submit that same pressure for change in vocabulary and usage that
> 
> any language experiences is constant and relentless. It is slowly changing
> the CW language as we know it. If that keeps More popular and in use, is
> that such a bad thing?
> 

Only if the new is better than the old. To judge whether a new form is better 
requires knowledge and understanding of the old way.  Too often, ignorance of 
the past results in a repeat of the mistakes of the past.

Remember the story about the railroad signal towers?

73 es ZUT de Jim, N2EY