2017-04-12 16:06:28 UTC
Today, in the iOS newsgroup (Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org>), I
was kindly reprimanded for using "cite" as a noun (instead of "citation" as
the more correct noun) where I 'dejavued to find only 'sidehand references
discussing "cite" as a noun in this, the canonical, a.u.e newsgroup.
Since it appears (from that search) that "cite as a noun" hasn't its own
thread, I post that canonical query here for discussion by the cognoscenti.
A key reference may be this blog:
"The Oxford English Dictionary has an entry for the noun
and considers it standard English. In fact, the OED lists
more than half a century of published references for
"cite" used as a shortened form of "citation."
However, that same article also explains:
"The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language
(4th ed.) and Merriam-Webster¡Šs Collegiate Dictionary
(11th ed.)¡Xdon¡Št have entries for "cite" as a noun.
Given the Br-AM divergence listed above, would you consider it proper to
use "cite" as a noun in both (Am) and (Br) English?