[R] [OT] "normal" (as in "Guassian")

[John Kane]

--- John Fox <jfox at mcmaster.ca> wrote:

> Dear Doug,
> 
> As I recall, according to Stigler, yes -- he wasn't
> the first to
> formulate Stigler's law of eponymy (but I don't
> recall to whom he
> attributed it).


Possibly a disgruntles M. de Moivre?


> 
> Regards,
>  John 
> 
> On Mon, 3 Mar 2008 12:17:59 -0600
>  "Douglas Bates" <bates at stat.wisc.edu> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 8:25 AM, Duncan Murdoch
> <murdoch at stats.uwo.ca>
> > wrote:
> > > On 3/3/2008 9:10 AM, Rogers, James A [PGRD
> Groton] wrote:
> > >  > As someone of partly French heritage, I would
> also ask how this
> > >  > distribution came to be called "Gaussian". It
> seems very unfair
> > to de
> > >  > Moivre, who discovered the distribution at
> least half a century
> > earlier.
> > >  > :-)
> > >
> > >  Just an example of Stigler's Law.
> > 
> > Taking this to a whole new level of "off topic", I
> wonder if
> > Stigler's
> > Law is self-referential?  That is, should
> Stigler's Law more
> > correctly
> > be attributed to someone else?
> > 
> > >  > On Mar 2, 2008, at 7:33 AM, (Ted Harding)
> wrote:
> > >  >
> > >  >> Hi Folks,
> > >  >> Apologies to anyone who'd prefer not to see
> this query
> > >  >> on this list; but I'm asking because it is
> probably the
> > >  >> forum where I'm most likely to get a good
> answer!
> > >  >>
> > >  >> I'm interested in the provenance of the name
> "normal
> > >  >> distribution" (for what I'd really prefer to
> call the
> > >  >> "Gaussian" distribution).
> > >  >>
> > >  >> According to Wikipedia, "The name "normal
> distribution"
> > >  >> was coined independently by Charles S.
> Peirce, Francis
> > >  >> Galton and Wilhelm Lexis around 1875."
> > >  >>
> > >  >> So be it, if that was the case -- but I
> would like to
> > >  >> know why they chose the name "normal": what
> did they
> > >  >> intend to convey?
> > >  >>
> > >  >> As background: I'm reflecting a bit on the
> usage in
> > >  >> statistics of "everyday language" as
> techincal terms,
> > >  >> as in "significantly different". This, for
> instance,
> > >  >> is likely to be misunderstood by the general
> publidc
> > >  >> when they encounter statements in the media.
> > >  >>
> > >  >> Likewise, "normally distributed" would
> probably be
> > >  >> interpreted as "distributed in the way one
> would
> > >  >> normally expect" or, perhaps, "there was
> nothing
> > >  >> unusual about the distribution."
> > >  >>
> > >  >> Comments welcome!
> > >  >> With thanks,
> > >  >> Ted.
> > >  >>
> > >  >
> > >  >
> ______________________________________________
> > >  > R-help at r-project.org mailing list
> > >  > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
> > >  > PLEASE do read the posting guide
> > http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
> > >  > and provide commented, minimal,
> self-contained, reproducible
> > code.
> > >
> > >  ______________________________________________
> > >  R-help at r-project.org mailing list
> > >  https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
> > >  PLEASE do read the posting guide
> > http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
> > >  and provide commented, minimal, self-contained,
> reproducible code.
> > >
> > 
> > ______________________________________________
> > R-help at r-project.org mailing list
> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
> > PLEASE do read the posting guide
> > http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
> > and provide commented, minimal, self-contained,
> reproducible code.
> 
> --------------------------------
> John Fox, Professor
> Department of Sociology
> McMaster University
> Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
> http://socserv.mcmaster.ca/jfox/
> 
> ______________________________________________
> R-help at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
> PLEASE do read the posting guide
> http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained,
> reproducible code.
>