From: willreich_77@yahoo.com   
      
   On Thursday, December 11, 2014 9:34:05 PM UTC-5, Brian M. Scott wrote:   
   > On Thu, 11 Dec 2014 21:10:38 -0500, William Vetter   
   >  wrote in   
   >  in   
   > rec.arts.sf.composition:   
   >   
   > [...]   
   >   
   > >>>> Not a very good example:  is a bog standard   
   > >>>> technical term in several fields, and I've been   
   > >>>> familiar with  since before I hit my   
   > >>>> teens.   
   >   
   > > These are not big words to me.  [...]   
   >   
   > Then you failed to make your point clearly in the previous   
   > post.  Or you assumed that we would simply take your word   
   > for it that he was using non-standard terminology, in which   
   > case the example was superfluous (and rather pointless).   
   >   
   > [...]   
   >   
   > > Yes, I know substrate is a science word, because I'm not   
   > > an idiot.   
   >   
   > I will agree that one can be an unpleasant jerk without   
   > necessarily being an idiot.   
   >   
   > > In semiconductor fabrication, nobody uses the word   
   > > "reticulate" in place of etching.  They write etch when   
   > > they mean etch.   
   >   
   > I have no reason to believe that it's being used here to   
   > mean 'etch'.  'Reticulated' describes (in general terms) the   
   > nature of the etching, not the fact of it.  Of course it's   
   > entirely possible that the term was being misused, but your   
   > sample sentence lacks sufficient context for us to determine   
   > whether that's the case.   
      
   The first time I encountered reticulated was when I read about the reticulated   
   python. Whomever etched that sucker must have done it while it was young or   
   sedated.   
      
   --   
   Will in New Haven   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)