"T" or "t"

[grahamthomson]

When referring to Transformers in fiction, should the convention be to spell it with a capital T or a lower-case t?

Would one write;

1. The Transformers invaded the humans' home planet.

2. The transformers invaded the humans' home planet

3. The transformers invaded the Humans' home planet

4. The Transformers invaded the Humans' home planet

The word "human" is a noun so should be spelled with a lower-case "h", but since "Transformers" is a brand-name it should be spelled with a capital "T" or does it become a noun in fiction as they are a race of beings like humans?

[Andy Turnbull]

I would say to spell it with the capital T as it seems more of a title conferred on them as opposed to what they are. They are after all first and foremost cybertronians. Transformation was an ability they were able to develop millenia after the race was in existence.

Andy

[Nigel]

I agree that it should be a capital T, but not with Andy's reason.

Cybertronian would refer to any species belonging to Cybertron. In many versions of the Transformers mythology, Transformers appear to be the only species on Cybertron; in these cases, Cybertronian and Transformers would be synonyms for the same race, if not necessarily technically correct. In the Marvel series, there is at least one other species living under Cybertron's surface; both these and Transformers are all Cybertronian, in the same way that humans, dogs and dolphins are all Earthlings (to borrow from science fiction, as I don't know of an actual word to represent all Earth's species).

If you assume "Transformers" to be the name of a race, then it is capitalized, in the same manner as Welsh, Scottish, English, etc. Of course, you could counter that argument by saying that it is the transformer species rather than the Transformer race, in which case it would not be capitalized; however, in this case the entire species comprise a single, undivided race. (Autobot, Decepticon etc are not races but names of formal groups, hence the capitalization.)

[Fortmax2020]

Terrans or terrans?

[Grand Moff Muffin]

'Transformers' with a 'T', for two reasons: (a) that's how it was written in official text stories, such as Marvel TF annuals and Ladybird books, and (b) a transformer is a device that increases or decreases the voltage and current of electricity.

I'd say 'Terrans' and 'Earthlings' should have capitals, because Earth (Terre in French), Cybertron, Mars, Nebulos, etc. all have capitals. 'Nebulan' always appears with a capital 'N' too.

And please note frequent fanfic spelling mistake no. 483: it's NebulAN not NebulON.

Martin

[Deleted]

Here's another thing to ponder. Is 'Transformers' one word or two? When it's abbrieviated it is known as TF which would assume that its two words but when the word/name Transformers is written it is just one word. In the early days of the original Transformers logo however it was written as 'Trans' and then 'Formers' underneath it so that makes it two words.

[Nigel]

ONE.

[Andy Turnbull]

Two words as the toyline was called The Trans Formers.

Andy

[Nigel]

No it wasn't. It is trademarked under a single name, Transformers.

The fact that the word has been split for use in logos cannot be used to conclude that it is intended to be two separate words (one of which is not even a word in itself). Equally, the fact that upper case has been used in logos cannot be used to conclude that the name is TRANSFORMERS. These are functions of artistry, design or aesthetics, not nomenclature.

The only trademarks registered with the IPO that use the split word are merely descriptive titles for the two-line logos.

It is worth noting that an abbreviation is not necessarily comprised of the first letters of each word in a name or title, for example MSc for Master of Science and Ofcom for Office of Communications. Also, TF is not an official Hasbro abbreviation; it does not appear on Hasbro documents, even for Star Wars Transformers, despite the company sometimes using SW as an acronym for Star Wars.

[grahamthomson]

Jun 10, 2008 18:35:21 GMT @zudobug said:

Here's another thing to ponder. Is 'Transformers' one word or two? When it's abbrieviated it is known as TF which would assume that its two words but when the word/name Transformers is written it is just one word. In the early days of the original Transformers logo however it was written as 'Trans' and then 'Formers' underneath it so that makes it two words.

Good question, Zudo'! Likely one to which we may never know the definitive answer!

The very early toy adverts Hasbro used to run in the Marvel UK comic had the term parsed as separate words, i.e. Trans Formers. Also I think Ms Cranna used to refer to the comic as being called Trans Formers, but when Mr Rimmer took over it was parsed as Transformers. Maybe it was personal preference?

[Nigel]

More the fact that Ms Cranna wasn't actually all that interested in Transformers and, by inference, didn't go to the effort of being correct?

[grahamthomson]

I'm not sure you could claim the level Cranna's interest in the Transformers as actual fact, unless you have recorded evidence of course, without causing defamation to her character.

If memory serves me right, the first few British pack-in toy catalogues referred to the brand as "Trans Formers". I could be wrong. Does anyone know of any online scans?

[Nigel]

I can't claim it as fact, but I'm pretty sure that Simon Furman said something to that effect at a convention. it is also evidenced to some extent by the content of the comic under her control. Some of it does not fit that well with Transformers and the brand's target audience. She didn't seem to "get" Transformers.

[Andy Turnbull]

Jun 12, 2008 9:34:01 GMT Nigel said:

I can't claim it as fact, but I'm pretty sure that Simon Furman said something to that effect at a convention. it is also evidenced to some extent by the content of the comic under her control. Some of it does not fit that well with Transformers and the brand's target audience. She didn't seem to "get" Transformers.

The content issue in the early days was a matter of budget as opposed to editorial control. The Marvel UK operation was run on a shoestring budget for many a year something that most ex-staffers have gone on at length. Hence why a lot of material used in titles was reprints, so you will probably find that had more to do with it. As the comic became a bigger seller it would get a bigger budget to play with.

You can see from looking at it, that the scope of age that the content catered for was actually pretty wide. The Planet Terry aimed at giving the younger kids something to read and Machine Man for an older age group. Looks like a good example of hedging their bets.

To be honest it really annoys me when people talk about editorial staff not getting the titles they work for. It's such utter bollocks her job wasn't TRANSFORMERS editor, she was a staff editor for MARVEL COMICS UK. Her responsibilities are to have a successful title that continues publishing and ensuring a book is produced and on the shelves week in and week out. She did that so I don't think you can have any complaints and whether she appreciated the transformers or not is irrelevant. Ian Rimmer took over and there's no evidence that he had any fond feelings for the Transformers.

Andy

[Nigel]

I know that she was a Marvel editor, not a Transformers editor; something that goes along with that job is that sometimes it will be required of the editor to work on an a title that they would not necessarily choose to.

You can see from looking at it, that the scope of age that the content catered for was actually pretty wide. The Planet Terry aimed at giving the younger kids something to read and Machine Man for an older age group. Looks like a good example of hedging their bets.

A fair point. Though it does raise the question of why hedge their bets? Does it mean they didn't know who the target market was? (Understandable for a new title, perhaps.) Worse, did they not understand who the target market was? I always found (in retrospect, mind, as I didn't get those earlier issues until much later) that Planet Terry and some small features were too young and did not sit well with the older-reader Transformers and back-uo strips.

[The Doctor]

Cranna must have done something right. The comic survived long enough to produce original material, increase it's frequency and go full colour. Had 'the kids' thought it was pish from the get-go, it wouldn't have lasted past #8.

-Ralph

[Grand Moff Muffin]

Jun 12, 2008 9:10:24 GMT @grahamthomson said:

I'm not sure you could claim the level Cranna's interest in the Transformers as actual fact, unless you have recorded evidence of course, without causing defamation to her character.

I would so love to see someone sue in the law courts for 'defamation of character' on grounds of whether or not they have a genuine interest in Transformers.

Martin

[Nigel]

From the "Transformers UK" history feature in Titan's Second Generation TPB:

"Cranna, by her own admission, had little empathy for the characters and happily ceded control to Ian Rimmer, fresh from his tenure on Captain Britain, and designer John Tomlinson."

I'm not saying that she wasn't important to Transformers - she hired Simon Furman, for one thing - but involvement doesn't equate to enjoyment.

[The Doctor]

Does it really matter?

-Ralph

[Andy Turnbull]

Jun 12, 2008 18:10:07 GMT Nigel said:

I'm not saying that she wasn't important to Transformers - she hired Simon Furman, for one thing - but involvement doesn't equate to enjoyment.

But the point is enjoyment isn't necessarily an essential part of doing the job. I'm sure Pat Lee enjoyed doing Transformers comics but ended up ass-raping the franchise and his staff. The staff at fun publications enjoy doing Transformers comics but as yet none of them have been any good. Bob Budiansky has gone on record enough times as saying that he saw it as a job no more, no less fun at times, and less fun at other times. They don't have to be cock-a-hoop to be doing Transformers in order to do a good job.

Cranna did a good job as the comic survived in it's early issues which is a difficult thing for a comic and in particular a licensed property and whether or not she liked the Transformers has no bearing at all.

Andy

[Nigel]

I wish I hadn't bothered now. All I was suggesting was that possibly, as she was less than fully appreciative of Transformers, perhaps she did not give the due attention to the correct name.

I was not so much criticising Sheila Cranna as the fact that a single word is sometimes incorrectly split into two. If you've seen some of my posts over the last few months, you will know that incorrect grammar and English is a particular bugbear of mine at the moment.

[grahamthomson]

I did my own search for "Trans Formers" on the website Nigel posted about earlier... and what do you know?

www.ipo.gov.uk/search.htm?words=trans+formers

Seems like both "Transformers" and "Trans Formers" are equally legitimate forms of the trademark.

We can all rest peacefully tonight safe in the absolute knowledge that both Transformers and Trans Formers are equally correct and valid.

[grahamthomson]

Jun 12, 2008 19:27:02 GMT Nigel said:

If you've seen some of my posts over the last few months, you will know that incorrect grammar and English is a particular bugbear of mine at the moment.

By the way Nigel, shouldn't it be (since you've used plural nouns which require a plural verb to follow):

"... incorrect grammar and English are particular bugbears of mine at the moment."

[Nigel]

Yes, if you take "grammar" and "English" to be separate items; no, if you take "grammar and English" to be a set of items. Really, for the former it should read, "incorrect grammar and incorrect English", otherwise the bugbears are "incorrect grammar" and "English".

Graham, that IPO link you made is the same as my second one was supposed to be, but I see that something went wrong with my link, leading to the search page rather than the results, my apologies. As I said before, the separation there is a descriptive title; it is the logo itself that is trademarked and "TRANS FORMERS" merely shows what text is in the trademark. The words themselves are not trademarked in those registraions.

I have always known the name to be "Transformers" and the two-line arrangement to be just the logo. I had no idea and I'm surprised that anyone had ever read it as two words. As far as I can see, it is purely a design and branding decision. "Transformers" is a long word; if it were in one line, just think how small it would have to be printed on, say, a Mini Autobot backing card. By splitting the word in two, it can be big and bold. (In fact, if you take the letters and put them into one line, keeping the font and size the same, they would not fit even along the longer edge of a Mini Autobot card.)

[grahamthomson]

Jun 13, 2008 8:09:11 GMT Nigel said:

I have always known the name to be "Transformers" and the two-line arrangement to be just the logo. I had no idea and I'm surprised that anyone had ever read it as two words.

If that is truly the case, then your journey through life has offered you a turning point and a wondrous opportunity to open your mind to new possibilities and enrich the world around you. You have spent almost thirty years knowing one thing, now to be shown evidence of a different way of looking at it.

If you accept open-mindedly that some of the other people that share this planet with you are of a differing persuasion and respect their differing views and interpretations of a given scenario (especially more so on the little things like parsing a children's toy's brand name as one or two words) then you are growing and evolving with the rest of society that is enriched with the concepts of tolerance, acceptance and diversity.

But (as you seem to have indicated with your previous posts, insisting that your dogmatic view is the correct one, casting others in bad light who offer something different, and spending a lot of time trying to convince others with tentative evidence) you seem to be keeping a closed-mind on the subject and not granting anyone else the freedom to express themselves.

The whole Transformers/Trans Formers scenario is trivial, I admit, but I personally find your reactions to it and other people's thoughts to it most interesting indeed. If someone wants to use the term "Trans Formers" then what harm is it doing?

Let them. It matters little.

[Nigel]

I am an open minded person. I am quite happy to accept that the name can be read as two words. I am just not convinced that it should be and am perplexed as to why anyone would want to.

[The Doctor]

The sky is falling!

-Ralph

[Deleted]

I can't believe such a massive debate has been raised over one little question I thought would be appropriate in this thread.

[karla]

It wouldn't matter if everyones hands were broken, or infected and deformed from some horrible hand diease!
yeah, think about it...