Additional words that exist that are derived from the Greek element tribo-: nanotribology, [no dictionary seems to be available that has a definition for this term.] The following definitions came from various sources on the internet.

First, on Thursday, January 21, 1999, there was the following information from Dr. Jacqueline Krim, Professor of Physics at North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina:

“Thank you for your inquiry. Yes, I coined the term nanotribology in a paper I wrote in 1991, entitled, ‘Nanotribology of a Kr [krypton] monolayer: A Quartz Crystal Microbalance Study of Atomic-Scale Friction’, J. Krim, D. Solina and R. Chiarello, PRL, 66, (1991) p. 181-184.”

“I would define nanotribology as the sub-field of tribology involving contact geometries which are well-characterized at atomic length or time scales. These tend to be on the order of nanometers and nanoseconds.”

“JK”

Secondly, on Friday, January 22, 1999, I received another clarifying definition that I had requested from a contact I found on the internet.

I asked for a simple, easy to understand definition of “nanotribology” and this is what he sent to me:

“Tribology is the science and technology of two surfaces in relative motion which encompasses friction, wear, and lubrication. Nanotribology allows the study of friction and wear processes on nanoscale.”

Now you know what nanotribology means, don’t you? If you want to know more about nanotribology, here are excerpts of other definitions; but be WARNED that if they are too confusing or of no interest to you, you may scroll down to the area where other tribo- words are presented. Don’t give up before you see the rest of the list, please.

Micro/nanotribology as a field is concerned with experimental and theoretical investigations of processes ranging from atomic and molecular scales to the microscale, occurring during adhesion, friction, wear, and thin-film lubrication at sliding surfaces.

This involves determination of the chemical, physical and mechanical properties of the surfaces undergoing relative motion at length scales of the order of nanometers. Interaction between rubbing surfaces occurs at asperities [roughness of surfaces] at which the local pressure and temperatures can be very high.

These conditions can lead to formation of tribochemical films with the unusual properties necessary for efficient wear protection. The nanomechanical properties of these films are being investigated by interfacial force microscopy (IFM) which is capable of determining the elastic constants and anelastic behavior of the films in boundary layer lubrication.

Proposed nanotribology experiments for the Triboscope include studying the effect of different contact areas, scan directions and crystallographic orientations on both lubricated and unlubricated surfaces.

Tribology is the study of friction, lubrication and wear. Nanotribology is roughly defined as the study of these same phenomena down to the nN and nanometer force and length scales.

I hope I haven’t lost you in the sea of obfuscation (confusion, obscurity, or bewilderment) because there are other interesting words to learn. Here are additional examples that are derived from tribo-:

• triboelectric, an electrical charge produced by friction between two objects; such as, rubbing silk on a glass surface.
• triboelectricity, in physics, electrical charges produced by friction between two surfaces; static electricity.

Frictional electricity … was supposedly known to the ancient Greeks, particularly Thales of Miletus, who observed about 600 B.C. that when amber was rubbed, it would attract small bits of matter. The term “frictional electricity” gave way to “triboelectricity,” although since “tribo” means “to rub,” the newer term does little to change the concept.

—A.D. Moore (as seen in The American Heritage Dictionary of Science
by Robert K. Barnhart; Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston; 1986).


• tribofluorescence, triboflurescent; to give off light as a result of friction.
• tribologist, a specialist in the science of tribology.
• tribology, tribological, the science of the mechanisms of friction, lubrication, and wear of interacting surfaces that are in relative motion.
• triboluminescence, the quality of emitting light under friction or violent mechanical pressure.
• triboluminescent, exhibiting triboluminescence.
• tribophosphorescence, tribophosphorescent; to produce light by friction.
• tribothermoluminescence, thermoluminescence [luminescence resulting from exposure to high temperature] produced in a material as a result of friction.
• tribometer, an instrument for estimating sliding friction.
• tribophysics, the physical properties or phenomena associated with friction.
• tribophosphoroscope, an instrument for examining triboluminescence.
• tribulation, originally from Greek; then through Latin, “to press; affliction”; distress, great trial, or affliction.

“The Roman tribulum was a sledge consisting of a wooden block studded with sharp pieces of flint or iron teeth. It was used to bring force and pressure against wheat in grinding out grain.

The machine suggested the way trouble grinds people down and oppresses them, tribulations becoming another word for troubles and afflictions. The word is first recorded in English in 1330.”.

The Romans ground out their corn [make that grain-J.R.] with a heavy roller, mentioned in Vergil’s Georgics among agricultural instruments: the tribulum, diminutive noun, from tritere, trit —, to rub, from Greek tribein, to rub. Being ground under and pressed out made an excellent metaphor to express the trials and tribulations of the early Christians.

• Twenty grains equal one scruple.
• Three scruples equal one dram.
• Eight drams equal an apothecary's ounce; oz apoth.
• Twelve such ounces equal an apothecary's pound; lb apoth.

There are 7,000 grains in one pound avoirdupois or 0.454 kilograms.

When the rules for the euro were first drafted 15 years ago, the leaders of France and Germany had to compromise even to agree on its name: Berlin wanted a 'a stability pact,' emphasizing Germanic fiscal discipline, while the French leaders insisted on adding 'growth' to the title to make it more palatable to their voters."

My focus these days is to collect English words that are derived from Latin and Greek sources (and their definitions). This self-imposed task is being done to provide the cross-reference area with as many Latin-Greek-English words as possible in the time that I am granted for the project.

Recently, a new book about the making of the Oxford English Dictionary, titled The Professor and the Madman — A Tale of Murder, Insanity, and the Making of the Oxford English Dictionary by Simon Winchester caught my attention. I bought the book and the audio because of my interest in lexicography.

Also, not long ago, I received an e-mail from an American, who had recently returned to California from England, in which he asked if I could explain why the British spell their words with “our”; such as, colour and why Americans spell it (and others) with “or”; such as with color, favor, etc.

As a result of my focus and because of the “our” and “or” question, I will be spending time in this newsletter presenting some information about dictionaries; also known as lexicons.

The earliest dictionaries were very limited in scope

• The earliest dictionary makers apparently were monks, men who lived in religious brotherhoods.
• During the seventh century, before the printing press was invented, these monks worked in church libraries making notes in the margins of their hand-lettered books.
• In those days, all books were written in Latin which was the language used in the Roman Catholic Church and in universities.
• The common people — farmers, shopkeepers, tradesmen, children — had no books of their own. In fact, it is very unlikely that they could even read because education was limited to very few people.
• Why did monks mark up the pages of their hand-made books? It seems the better educated monks who wrote the books wanted to make sure other monks who read the books would know what certain words meant.
• The notes came to be called glosses, from which we get our word glossasry — a list of words with definitions.
• For a thousand years, these glosses stayed in the books in church libraries. No one did anything with them.
• The term “dictionary” in one of its Latin forms (dictionarius, a collection of words) was used c. 1225 by an English scholar, John Garland, as the title for a manuscript of Latin words to be learned by memory.
• The words were not arranged in alphabetical order but in groups according to subject.
• This Dictionarius, was used only for the teacher’s classroom work in teaching Latin, and it contained no English except for a few interlined glosses (translations of single words).
• In the seventeenth century, some monks got the idea of making lists of those Latin glosses and translating them into English. The first dictionary, or glossary, was actually a list of Latin-English glosses. Monks in other countries also compiled Latin-French, Latin-Italian, and Latin-Spanish glossaries.
• Later in 1604, Robert Cawdrey, an English schoolmaster, published a dictionary, titled A Table Alphabeticall conteyning and teaching the true writing and understanding of hard usual English Wordes …with the interpretation thereof by plaine English words, gathered for the benefit & helpe of Ladies, Gentlewomen, or any other unskilfull persons.
• Although his dictionary included only difficult words, there is one principle of dictionary making that Cawdrey is remembered for today: he listed words in alphabetical order.
• Cawdrey, perhaps recalling the complicated groupings of words in some earlier dictionaries, stressed the importance of the word “alphabeticall” in his title.
• Apparently some “unskilfull persons” in his day (as in ours) had not taken the trouble to learn their ABC’s; so, he said, “Thou must learne the Alphabet, to wit, the order of the Letters as they stand.”

  Samuel Johnson and A Dictionary of the English Language

• In 1747, after Lord Philip Chesterfield had negotiated with Samuel Johnson to write a new dictionary that could be used by all of the people, Johnson started the project.
• So confident was Johnson of his literary powers that he offered to write the dictionary in three years. Friends warned him that such a short time wouldn’t be enough. It had taken forty French scholars forty years to write a French dictionary. Shouldn’t he reconsider? “Nonsense,” Johson replied in effect. “Any Englishman is the equal of forty Frenchmen. Three years! That’s all it will take.”
• In 1755, Johnson finished A Dictionary of the English Language— eight years of “sluggishly treading the track of the alphabet,” he told friends, not three — and he wasn’t at all satisfied with the work he produced; but during those years, he had learned a great deal about words and how they make up language.
• In his Preface, Johnson started by writing: “It is the fate of those who toil at the lower employments of life, to be rather driven by the fear of evil, than attracted by the prospect of good; to be exposed to censure, without hope of praise; to be disgraced by miscarriage, or punished for neglect, where success would have been without applause, and diligence without reward.”
• “Among these unhappy mortals is the writer of dictionaries; whom mankind have considered, not as the pupil, but the slave of science, the pioneer of literature, doomed only to remove rubbish and clear obstructions from the paths of Learning and Genius, who presses forward to conquest and glory, without bestowing a smile on the humble drudge that facilitates their progress.”
• “Every other authour may aspire to praise; the lexicographer can only hope to escape reproach, and even this negative recompense has been yet granted to very few.”
• “Later in his Preface, he wrote: “Of the event of this work, for which, having laboured it with so much application, I cannot but have some degree of parental fondness, it is natural to form conjectures.”
• “Those who have been persuaded to think well of my design, require that it should fix our language, and put a stop to those alterations which time and chance have hitherto been suffered to make in it without opposition. With this consequence I will confess that I flattered myself for a while; but now begin to fear that I have indulged expectation which neither reason or experience can justify.”
• “When we see men grow old and die at a certain time one after another, from century to century, we laugh at the elixir that promises to prolong life to a thousand years; and with equal justice may the lexicographer be derided, who being able to produce no example of a nation that has preserved their words and phrases from mutability, shall imagine that his dictionary can embalm his language, and secure it from corruption and decay, that it is in his power to change sublunary* nature, or clear the world at once from folly, vanity, and affectation.” [*sublunary: of this world, earthly].
• After a lengthy explanation of how it is impossible to prevent changes in a language, especially when “As by the cultivation of various sciences, a language is amplified, it will be more furnished with words deflected from their original sense ….”; he goes on to say, “If the changes that we fear be thus irresistible, what remains but to acquiesce with silence, as in the other insurmountable distresses of humanity?”
• “It remains that we retard what we cannot repel, that we palliate* what we cannot cure. Life may be lengthened by care, though death cannot be ultimately defeated: tongues, like governments, have a natural tendency to degeneration; we have long preserved our constitution, let us make some struggles for our language.” [*palliate, to make less intense or severe; to mitigate].
• Johnson’s work was a landmark in the history of dictionary making. It was the first time anyone had put down on paper the words that actually made up the English language, and it set basic guides for the craft of dictionary making. Lexicographers for the next two centuries would follow many of the principles Johnson had established.

  Early American dictionary makers

• Near the end of the 18th century, more than 20% of the world’s English-speaking people were living in the United States.
• Their policy of universal education indicated a need for an English dictionary designed for use in primary schools.
• In 1798, a Connecticut schoolmaster, Samuel Johnson, Jr., produced in New Haven, Conneticut, a little book titled A School Dictionary.
• Also in 1800, The Columbian Dictionary, by Caleb Alexander of Massachusetts, had about 32,000 entries in which American usage was recognized by a few words (cent, dime, dollar, elector, congress, Congressional, lengthy, minute-man, Presidential, Yanky), and honor, favor, color, and troop were spelled as such.
• The Columbian Dictionary also included some alternatives such as: calendar-kalendar, chequer-checker, screen-skreen, sponge-spunge.
• Alexander included simple words, providing a vocabulary that could reasonably be called “complete.”
• Was this where Noah Webster got his ideas for respelling the “our” words (colour, favour) to “or” (color, favor)?

  Noah Webster, the “father” of American dictionaries

• One American who objected to the “personal style” of Samuel Johnson’s dictionary was a “sober, pious” New England schoolmaster named Noah Webster. “Johnson was always depressed by poverty,” he said tartly. “He was naturally indolent and seldom wrote until he was urged by want. Hence … he was compelled to prepare his manuscripts in haste.”
• In his view, dictionary making allowed no compromise, permitted no weakness. Webster set a standard for dictionary making that continues to this day.
• He attended Yale College and, five years after graduation, in 1783, he published his Blue-Back Speller, America’s first speller, grammar, and reader.
• This book sold an amazing million copies a year at a time when the entire populatiion of the United States was only 23 million. It stayed in print over a century (under the titles The American Spelling Book and later The Elementary Spelling Book) and sold a total of 70 million copies.
• Apparently, the money the book earned made it possible for Webster to spend his tlme doing what he really wanted; that is, writing dictionaries. To prepare himself for the task, he set about studying languages and in time learned twenty-six, including Anglo-Saxon and Sanskrit.
• The basic reason Americans needed a dictionary of their own, Webster believed, was that American English was different from the English of Johnson’s day. Settlers in America had spoken English for two centuries and had invented their own words to describe conditions in this new land.
• In 1806, Webster published A Compendious Dictionary of the English Language. By compendious, he meant “concise, brief, a summary.” His dictionary is important in the story of dictionaries because in the long history of lexicography, it showed for the first time how Americans spoke English.
• Of the 37,000 words in Webster’s dictionary, about 5,000 were native to America and never before had appeared in any British-English dictionary. Squash, skunk, raccoon, hickory, caucus, presidency, congressional, bullfrog, and applesauce are a few examples.
• Like Johnson, Webster searched for words in books, but he also tried something new — and established a principle of dictioinary making that has been followed ever since. He began recording words as he heard people use them. In doing so, he followed Johnson’s theory that spoken words make up a language.
• Webster had a few ideas about fixing the spelling of some words. The way many words were spelled, he noted, had no relation to the way they were pronounced.
• This offended Webster’s neat and orderly way of doing things. As he went about writing the Compendious, he changed the spelling of many words to match their sounds. He dropped the silent “u” in the English spelling of honour and favour and wrote honor and favor, and the final “k” in musick, logick, and publick and used instead music, logic, and public. He also dropped the second “l” in traveller, labelled, and farewell and transposed the last two letters in English words like centre and theatre.
• Webster also tried to simplify the spelling of other words by dropping silent letters: “e” from imagine, “e” from definite, “b” from thumb, “a” from feather, and “a” from head. For these spellings, he substituted imagin, definit, thum, fether, and hed. Most people were not ready for these new versions and so such spellings never became acceptable.
• For some unexplainable reasons, Americans went along, over two hundred years ago, with favor, honor, public, logic, music, traveler, and labeled. They also agreed to switch the “re” to “er” in center and theater; but they strongly objected to most of the other changes Webster suggested.
• We still write thumb with a “b”, head and feather with an “a”, farewell with a double “l”, and imagine and definite with a final “e” even though these letters serve no purpose; except perhaps to show the unpredictable way language develops and that people, not grammarians or dictionary makers, primarily determine how we spell the words we read and write.
• Samuel Johnson’s suggestion that dictionary makers, “retard what we cannot repel” ; that is, slow the process of drastic changes in English since they cannot be stopped or rejected; may actually be working. Dictionaries are often the “authority” that we consult when people have doubts about the “correct” meanings and applications of words and so may indeed provide stability in the language.

Phrases of words that describe the term war:

• armed conflict
• warfare
• hostilities
• military operations
• clash of arms
• combat
• military attacks
• battle with opponents
• take up arms