30th May 2014, 04:15 PM
Nothings wider than the sphere of archaeology. I agree that its come out of eia terminology but in as much as it is a Latin derived word apparently: to receive, it seems to have been used in the 18th century in the sense of a treasurer and in some cases as a receiver of stolen goods. Early 20th it seems to have been taken on board by the medics presumably directly from their Latin and they held it for most of that century and its still going strong with them. So far on the European technocrats angle at the moment the Americans seem to have the edge with combining receptor heritage and environment: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=7-xiM...or&f=false and they are amongst the earliest proponents of eia-sometime around the Vietnam war.
My dream is that no archaeologist sitting in a site hut will ever use the word receptor without the same contempt as applied to the word bioturbation.
My dream is that no archaeologist sitting in a site hut will ever use the word receptor without the same contempt as applied to the word bioturbation.
.....nature was dead and the past does not exist