Subject: | |
From: | |
Date: | Fri Mar 31 17:19:00 2006 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
----------------- HES POSTING -----------------
Malcolm Rutherford's query on the first use of the expression
"Business Cycle", as opposed to "Trade Cycle" raises another
interesting question: what are the different implications of these
notions (and of "industrial fluctuations", used by Robertson and
Pigou)? Malcolm gives the answer for Mitchell's case; but how far
were other writers consciously choosing between one term and the
other?
I have the impression that usage depends (in part, at least) on the
continent: while in the US the expression "Business Cycle" seems
to be used more frequently than "Trade Cycle", the opposite seems
to be the case in Britain. But perhaps I am wrong in this
generalization, or perhaps this reflects the relatively large number
of institutional economists in the US: could anyone throw some
light on this?
As to Malcolm's question: perhaps the answer can be found in the
largest edition of the Oxford English Dictionary, which reports the
ethymology and the first usage of terms. Unfortunately I do not
have it at hand, and cannot check myself.
Another question: why "Business Cycle" and "Trade Cycle" in
capital letters? This was often used in the 1930s, while it is rare in
post-war writings.
Daniele Besomi
------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]
|
|
|