"Ex. aeq."

dublinguy2004

Is it just me or are standards slipping in this once fine educational establishment? I've noticed "ex. aeq." appearing beside lots of names on the undergraduate results page, surely what is meant is "ex. aequo." My understanding is that "ex. aeq." means without water (well-known medical/chemical term) and "ex. aequo." means on equal footing.
Maybe I'm wrong about this or am completely pedantic, but perhaps someone from the arts block can enlighten me, a mere physicist.
If I am correct, how can we change things? Too often latin abbreviations are used in the completely wrong context making one look just plain stupid instead of intellecutally enlightened.

ApeXaviour

Meh.. whatever. They should just scrap using latin altogether for things like this. It's just plain pretentious.

Edit:
You're a physicist dublinguy? What subject/year? Please post in the who's who. Cheers

punka

ex aeq. is short for ex aequo.

ex aq. is short for ex aqua which means "in water"

"without water" would be sine aqua, but as i'm not a scientist i don't know if there's a specific abbreviation for it.

Kevin_rc_ie

hehe

punka

latin: it's delicious AND nutritious

Jim_No.6

Actually, "ex aqua" would mean "out of (from) water", no?

punka

Yes, ex does have that sense, but it also has the sense "out of," => "with," a bit like the way we say "i made this out of clay."

D. To denote technically the material, out of, i. e. with which any thing to eat or drink, etc., is mixed or prepared (esp. freq. of medical preparations): ...bibat jejunus ex aqua castoreum, Cels. 3, 23...

(taken from here.)

Hence "ex aqua" means "in water," because it's "with water."

Kevin_rc_ie

ah punka you're digging now. don't worry we still like you.

Slurries

hey i think it means they have the same score? as in the same percent.

Fad

Slurries wrote: »

hey i think it means they have the same score? as in the same percent.

I couldn't sleep until I read a response for this, THANK YOU

electrogrimey

Uninformed trolls are the worst.

Denerick

Mankind generally has seen intellectual degeneration over the last 50 years, the emphasis is now on spoonfeeding rather than independent thought, and groups such as the SU like to spread this strange new culture of a delegation of personal responsibility. The universities have especially underwent some serious changes, (mainly negative) also add in the fact that people don't read anymore.

shay_562

Denerick wrote:

Mankind generally has seen intellectual degeneration over the last 50 years, the emphasis is now on spoonfeeding rather than independent thought, and groups such as the SU like to spread this strange new culture of a delegation of personal responsibility. The universities have especially underwent some serious changes, (mainly negative) also add in the fact that people don't read anymore.

Yep, totally. Except that independent thought wasn't exactly more prevalent in this country 50 years ago when the Catholic Church basically told everyone how to think (and how best to shun those who thought the wrong way), or even in theoretically more advanced countries like the USA, where all the independent thought in the world wouldn't help you if you were black, in which case a huge proportion of the population would consider you genuinely sub-human and unworthy of expressing your independent thoughts in the same schools.

I also wish that a promoter of independent thought wouldn't shoehorn his dislike for the SU into every bloody thread, no matter how irrelevant. I mean, seriously, whatever other ills they're responsible for, Latin abbreviations and fewer people reading are hardly their fault, and repeatedly bashing them in random threads isn't going to change anyone's mind, or really do anything except make you seem slightly obsessed and crazy.

I'd also also hope that a champion of thought of any kind wouldn't use grammar like "have underwent", would realise that the parentheses should probably come before the comma and might notice that the second half of that final sentence is a random fragment and that the comma may not be appropriate at all. I'd suggest you blame the falling standards of university teaching, but that might undermine your heartfelt stance on people taking personal responsibility for their failings.

Denerick

Good grammar is the last refuge of the unimaginative.

PurpleFistMixer

Isn't this entire thread about a pedantic linguistic point?

Mark200

PurpleFistMixer wrote: »

Isn't this entire thread about a pedantic linguistic point?

Yeah... from 2005!

electrogrimey

Mark200 wrote: »

Yeah... from 2005!

Ah. Now I get why Fad's post was funny.

Very good.

Fad

electrogrimey wrote: »

Ah. Now I get why Fad's post was funny.

Very good.

Oh dear.......

SOL

well it's been a long time since I've read and posts on the TCD board and standards have definitely slipped...