Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: English 101

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Hmmmm....I see your interpretation.

My thinking was (is?) that if "aseismic design" is translated to "almost
free of earthquake design", I would interpret this approach as one where the
designer didn't consider earthquakes in his/her design whatsoever.

This English is a funny language.


Bill Allen, S.E. (CA #2607)
Consulting Structural Engineers
Laguna Niguel, CA
V (949) 365-5696
F (949) 249-2297

||-----Original Message-----
||From: fturner [mailto:fturner(--nospam--at)]
||Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2000 6:19 PM
||To: seaint(--nospam--at)
||Subject: Re: English 101
||Sorry I was out for the last couple days and missed this critical
||Bill, if you agree with the definition of "aseismic" as
||"almost free of
||earthquakes" as promoted by B. Bolt in his books titled
||"Earthquakes", then
||"aseismic" is indeed "seismic" albeit just a wee bit.
||Several Japanese-translated publications use the aseismic
||term. Along those
||lines, I wonder if some of the Japanese think we are trying
||to repair and
||reoccupy old buildings when the translation for the term
||"rehabilitation" is
||applied literally...
||----- Original Message -----
||From: "Barry Welliver" <wellive(--nospam--at)>
||To: <seaint(--nospam--at)>
||Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2000 6:11 AM
||Subject: Re: English 101
||> Gosh, is there some inside meaning I'm missing about this
||retrofit vs
||> rehabilitation controversy?? Perhaps we should retrofire a
||discussion like
||> on the Structualist??
||> Barry H. Welliver
||> Bill Allen wrote:
||> > Fred-
||> >
||> > Thanks.
||> >
||> > But, the definition you have provided sounds pretty
||"non-seismic" to me.
||> >
||> > Besides, wouldn't "aseismic" have to mean either "seismic" or
||> >
||> > Get off that fence :o).