what about the possiblity that the word "history" is derived from the phrase "his story". Its always possible isnt it? —This unsigned comment was added by 188.8.131.52 (talk • contribs).
No, that isn't possible. At least, not without a time machine and the ability to simultaneously change the internal wiring of millions of people's brains. --Connel MacKenzie 16:20, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
How would you define it? I'd say it's used to mean that the relationship with the subject is a thing of the past, over. I'm not certain that's the whole story though ("the November proposal is history", "as soon as the cancel script is working, pre-approval is history"). So perhaps we should have two defs:
(of a proposal or situation) the proposal, situation, etc. is no longer current
(of a person) the relationship with he subject is over, a thing of the past"
I'm not convinced we can't do better than that though. Thryduulf (talk) 16:28, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
This lists medical history as a separate sense, and I'm not seeing it. One example sentences are "A personal medical history is required for the insurance policy." (i.e. a personal history, specializing in the medical aspects, is required). "He has a history of cancer in his family." is interesting; "he has a history of" seems to be a very medical turn of phrase, looking at Google Books, but it looks like people will say stuff like "He has a history of shoplifting and taking money from his mother's purse." and "He has a history of reportedly attacking other students." and (more atypically) "He has a history of being right, in the face of doubters." and "He has a history of many different living arrangements..." It seems like the sense of history above it, "A record or narrative description of past events."
(I didn't tag it, but (computing) A record of previous user events. seems like it go for the same reason.)--Prosfilaes (talk) 21:50, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Definitely keep computer sense ("He cleared his history" doesn't seem to make sense in terms of any other meaning of "history"). I wouldn't be opposed to deleting the medical sense if we had the more general personal history sense you talk about, but none of the other senses quite fit. So unless someone can persuade me that "a history of heart disease" is just "the aggregate of past heart disease", I say keep for now. Smurrayinchester (talk) 22:20, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
I can't put my finger on why (maybe it'll come to me), but the medical sense seems distinct to me.—msh210℠ (talk) 22:48, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
One thing we lacked was a sense like "A set of events involving an entity." This is distinct from "a record of such events", for which we had a differently worded sense. The usage in "What's the patient's history?", implying "set of medically relevant events" does not seem to me to be any more distinct than any other occupation- or institution-specific use of "history". But we have 5 senses of history and MWOnline has 10 senses and subsenses. AHD has 11. Both see fit to include the medical history sense. DCDuringTALK 02:05, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
I'd say that these dictionaries have two groups of senses, one focused on real events, the other on records or narratives. Their medical and criminological senses focus on the record aspect, even the formal record. I would have thought that usage would at least equally be concerned with the actual events, whatever the state of a formal record. DCDuringTALK 02:14, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Well then, gasping for air is related to respiration but it is not one of the criteria for respiratory sounds. This is a term you would find in any medical dictionary and if we have room for sports terminology and every combination of vulgarities how can we be treated seriously if we refuse medical terms?Lucifer (talk) 20:02, 19 June 2012 (UTC)