plural of abbreviations

[Kalmia]

I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.

I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by whether or
not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case of an abbreviation.
I was filing some EOB's. OR, it is EOBs?

What about this one? "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark." Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.

Thanks,
Kalmia

[Cheryl]

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by whether or
not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case of an abbreviation.
I was filing some EOB's. OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one? "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark." Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.
Thanks,
Kalmia

I think it's a controversial question. Generally, you don't use the
apostrophe for the plural of an abbreviation, but you can, if it's
confusing without the apostrophe. "Confusing" seems to be the subject of
debate.

I tend to leave the apostrophe out in the plural of numbers, letters and
abbreviations, but I have to admit that As can mean 'As' as well as more
than one A, so it might be better to write A's even though I don't like it.

[Mark Brader]

Post by Cheryl

Post by Kalmia
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by whether or
not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case of an abbreviation.
I was filing some EOB's. OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one? "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark." Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.

I think it's a controversial question. Generally, you don't use the
apostrophe for the plural of an abbreviation, but you can, if it's
confusing without the apostrophe. ...

I agree with Cheryl and the others; that correctly describes modern
style. This is something that's changed in recent decades. 50 years
ago the rule was that if something didn't look like an English word,
then inflectional suffixes had to be set off with an apostrophe. So
the plural of ABC or A.B.C. was ABCs or A.B.C.'s. Some people still
stick by that rule, but as far as I can tell they're in a minority now.

[John Varela]

Post by Mark Brader

Post by Cheryl

Post by Kalmia
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by whether or
not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case of an abbreviation.
I was filing some EOB's. OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one? "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark." Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.

I think it's a controversial question. Generally, you don't use the
apostrophe for the plural of an abbreviation, but you can, if it's
confusing without the apostrophe. ...

I agree with Cheryl and the others; that correctly describes modern
style. This is something that's changed in recent decades. 50 years
ago the rule was that if something didn't look like an English word,
then inflectional suffixes had to be set off with an apostrophe. So
the plural of ABC or A.B.C. was ABCs or A.B.C.'s. Some people still
stick by that rule, but as far as I can tell they're in a minority now.

I don't know about others, but I started dropping the apostrophe
just about 50 years ago when I got into a business that was replete
with acronyms. VORs, ETAs, TASes (that's a hard one), COMPOOLs,
RADARs, CPUs, three-letter program names and four-letter item names,
etc.

[James Hogg]

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by whether or
not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case of an abbreviation.
I was filing some EOB's. OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one? "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark." Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.

We can do without the apostrophes in EOBs and MBEs and CODs and YMCAs.
In cases where the omission of an apostrophe might cause confusion, keep
it in. You can thus distinguish "three a's" from the word "as".

And there are only two l's in "really".

[Steve Hayes]

Post by James Hogg

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by whether or
not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case of an abbreviation.
I was filing some EOB's. OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one? "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark." Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.

We can do without the apostrophes in EOBs and MBEs and CODs and YMCAs.
In cases where the omission of an apostrophe might cause confusion, keep
it in. You can thus distinguish "three a's" from the word "as".
And there are only two l's in "really".

There's do's and don'ts, and dos and windows.

[Peter Moylan]

Post by James Hogg

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by whether or
not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case of an abbreviation.
I was filing some EOB's. OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one? "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark." Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.

We can do without the apostrophes in EOBs and MBEs and CODs and YMCAs.
In cases where the omission of an apostrophe might cause confusion, keep
it in. You can thus distinguish "three a's" from the word "as".
And there are only two l's in "really".

You can also use an apostrophe to indicate omitted letters, if you
real'ly think there should be more. Of course, you'd confuse everyone
who didn't know what you were on about.

[James Hogg]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by James Hogg

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by whether or
not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case of an abbreviation.
I was filing some EOB's. OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one? "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark." Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.

We can do without the apostrophes in EOBs and MBEs and CODs and YMCAs.
In cases where the omission of an apostrophe might cause confusion, keep
it in. You can thus distinguish "three a's" from the word "as".
And there are only two l's in "really".

You can also use an apostrophe to indicate omitted letters, if you
real'ly think there should be more. Of course, you'd confuse everyone
who didn't know what you were on about.

The apostrophe is useful, for instance, if you want to abbreviate
greengrocers as 'grocers.

[Chuck Riggs]

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by whether or
not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case of an abbreviation.
I was filing some EOB's. OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one? "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark." Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.

We can do without the apostrophes in EOBs...

Do you have a mouse in your pocket, James?

[James Hogg]

Post by Chuck Riggs

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by whether or
not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case of an abbreviation.
I was filing some EOB's. OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one? "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark." Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.

We can do without the apostrophes in EOBs...

Do you have a mouse in your pocket, James?

No, I'm just glad to see you.

[Chuck Riggs]

Post by James Hogg

Post by Chuck Riggs

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by whether or
not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case of an abbreviation.
I was filing some EOB's. OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one? "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark." Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.

We can do without the apostrophes in EOBs...

Do you have a mouse in your pocket, James?

No, I'm just glad to see you.

Too bad, you could have shot that mouse.

[HVS]

fI promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing
found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by
whether or not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case of
an abbreviation. I was filing some EOB's. OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one? "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark." Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.

The rules are not hard and fast.

Many people ridicule apostrophised plural abbreviations -- CD's,
DVD's -- and although that practice does have a respectable
history, it's probably best to avoid it simply on the grounds of
least offence. (Those who get upset with the apostrophe will
appreciate seeing "CDs" and "DVDs", while those who don't get upset
won't object if it's left out.)

Single letters, on the other hand, take the apostrophe if leaving
it out could cause confusions: it's "Mind your p's and q's", not
"Mind your ps and qs". (In your example, it would be "two A's in
aardvark", but one could get away with writing about "the three
Rs".)

[Kalmia]

Post by HVS

fI promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing
found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by
whether or not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case of
an abbreviation. I was filing some EOB's.  OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one?  "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark."  Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.

The rules are not hard and fast.
Many people ridicule apostrophised plural abbreviations -- CD's,
DVD's -- and although that practice does have a respectable
history, it's probably best to avoid it simply on the grounds of
least offence.  (Those who get upset with the apostrophe will
appreciate seeing "CDs" and "DVDs", while those who don't get upset
won't object if it's left out.)
Single letters, on the other hand, take the apostrophe if leaving
it out could cause confusions:  it's "Mind your p's and q's", not
"Mind your ps and qs".  (In your example, it would be "two A's in
aardvark", but one could get away with writing about "the three
Rs".)

Agh - now I'm reeeaaaalllllly torn between the choices in your three
Rs example. : ))

By the way, isn't it 'offense"? Or is this the non-american
spelling? Just trying to learn, not condemn.

[HVS]

Post by Kalmia

Post by HVS

fI promise - I searched this group as best I could, but
nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by
whether or not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case
of an abbreviation. I was filing some EOB's.  OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one?  "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark."  Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.

The rules are not hard and fast.
Many people ridicule apostrophised plural abbreviations --
CD's, DVD's -- and although that practice does have a
respectable history, it's probably best to avoid it simply on
the grounds of least offence.  (Those who get upset with the
apostrophe will appreciate seeing "CDs" and "DVDs", while those
who don't get upset won't object if it's left out.)
Single letters, on the other hand, take the apostrophe if
leaving it out could cause confusions:  it's "Mind your p's and
q's", not "Mind your ps and qs".  (In your example, it would be
"two A's in aardvark", but one could get away with writing
about "the three Rs".)

Agh - now I'm reeeaaaalllllly torn between the choices in your
three Rs example. : ))
By the way, isn't it 'offense"? Or is this the non-american
spelling? Just trying to learn, not condemn.

It's one of those pesky BrE/AmE spelling differences.

[Kalmia]

Post by HVS

Post by Kalmia

Post by HVS

fI promise - I searched this group as best I could, but
nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by
whether or not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case
of an abbreviation. I was filing some EOB's.  OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one?  "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark."  Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.

The rules are not hard and fast.
Many people ridicule apostrophised plural abbreviations --
CD's, DVD's -- and although that practice does have a
respectable history, it's probably best to avoid it simply on
the grounds of least offence.  (Those who get upset with the
apostrophe will appreciate seeing "CDs" and "DVDs", while those
who don't get upset won't object if it's left out.)
Single letters, on the other hand, take the apostrophe if
leaving it out could cause confusions:  it's "Mind your p's and
q's", not "Mind your ps and qs".  (In your example, it would be
"two A's in aardvark", but one could get away with writing
about "the three Rs".)

Agh - now I'm reeeaaaalllllly torn between the choices in your
three Rs example.  : ))
By the way, isn't it 'offense"?   Or is this the non-american
spelling? Just trying to learn, not condemn.

It's one of those pesky BrE/AmE spelling differences.

This could be getting far afield, but are there differences between
BrE and Australian spellings? Seems they like to spell ladies as
ladys. No?

[HVS]

-snip-

Post by Kalmia

Post by HVS

Post by Kalmia
By the way, isn't it 'offense"?   Or is this the non-american
spelling? Just trying to learn, not condemn.

It's one of those pesky BrE/AmE spelling differences.

This could be getting far afield, but are there differences between
BrE and Australian spellings? Seems they like to spell ladies as
ladys. No?

I can't speak for AusE, but I've never seen "ladys" in any standard
form of written English. (It looks like a form of "cute" spelling to
me -- similar to "ladees 'n' jennelmen".)

[Peter Duncanson (BrE)]

Post by HVS
-snip-

Post by Kalmia

Post by HVS

Post by Kalmia
By the way, isn't it 'offense"?   Or is this the non-american
spelling? Just trying to learn, not condemn.

It's one of those pesky BrE/AmE spelling differences.

This could be getting far afield, but are there differences between
BrE and Australian spellings? Seems they like to spell ladies as
ladys. No?

I can't speak for AusE, but I've never seen "ladys" in any standard
form of written English. (It looks like a form of "cute" spelling to
me -- similar to "ladees 'n' jennelmen".)

There is a place in Australia named Ladys Pass.
http://www.domain.com.au/Public/SuburbProfile.aspx?searchTerm=Ladys%20Pass&mode=research

I haven't been able to discover the origin of the name. It might be
Lady's with the apostrophe omitted. Apostrophes are often omitted from
place names. Queens, New York City, was named for Queen Catherine of
Braganza[1]. "Queens" is therefore the apostrophe-less possessive form
of "Queen".

A Google search for
"ladys" site:.au
finds many cases where "ladys" could be interpreted as the possessive
form of "lady" or as a possessive plural of "lady". In other instances
"ladys" is used as the plural of "lady".

http://adelaide.gumtree.com.au/c-Community-other-need-some-male-entertainment-for-a-ladys-only-party-W0QQAdIdZ171380124

hi there if your planning a ladys only party and want some wild fun
i can be your G string "or boxers" waiter and i do lap dances as
well ;) and i love to entertain ;) so contatct me if you like to
chat about a private party hens party what ever you like :)
CFNM is available as well :) so come on girls what are you waiting
for??????

So what if his spelling is a bit dodgy - he is not offering his services
as author or proofreader.

[1] According to:
http://queens.about.com/od/queensalmanac/f/queens_name.htm

[Peter Moylan]

Post by Peter Duncanson (BrE)

Post by HVS
-snip-

Post by Kalmia

Post by HVS

Post by Kalmia
By the way, isn't it 'offense"? Or is this the non-american
spelling? Just trying to learn, not condemn.

It's one of those pesky BrE/AmE spelling differences.

One of the factors making it more "pesky" - a word that's not normally
part of my vocabulary - is that I've now seen the "s" version so often
that it no longer looks wrong to me. That's a problem, because "looking
wrong" is my main defence against spelling errors.

Post by Peter Duncanson (BrE)

Post by HVS

Post by Kalmia
This could be getting far afield, but are there differences between
BrE and Australian spellings? Seems they like to spell ladies as
ladys. No?

No. Unless, as James pointed out, your name is Gladies.

There are, I believe, one or two cases where AusE spelling does not
agree with BrE spelling, but they are so rar^H^H^H uncommon that I can't
think of an example.

There are certainly vocabulary differences. For example, I say "truck"
where a BrE speaker would say "lorry".

Post by Peter Duncanson (BrE)
There is a place in Australia named Ladys Pass.
http://www.domain.com.au/Public/SuburbProfile.aspx?searchTerm=Ladys%20Pass&mode=research
I haven't been able to discover the origin of the name. It might be
Lady's with the apostrophe omitted. Apostrophes are often omitted from
place names.

In Australia, apostrophes are /always/ omitted from place names. I don't
approve, but nobody asked me. At some point the Geographical Names
Board, or whatever it's called, decided that, because people keep
getting the apostrophes wrong, they should all be summarily banished.

I can see one way in which this makes sense. Here's an example. Not far
from me there is a town called Nords Wharf. Originally this must have
been called either Nord's Wharf, probably after a person called Nord, or
Nords' Wharf, after a family. While writing this I discovered that
there's a short history of the place on the internet, so I now know that
my first conjecture was correct. Even so, most people aren't going to
look that up, and pretty much everyone has forgotten who Nord was. So
where should the apostrophe go? Simpler to leave it out.

There are other cases where the possessive has quietly disappeared.
Pulling another local place name out of the hat, I am prepared to guess
that the town known as Nelson Bay was once called Nelson's Bay. The
simplification, if there was one, would have happened after people had
forgotten the origin of the name. That sort of thing has happened all
over the world.

Completely off topic, but while place names are on my mind: the other
day I took a long drive inland in order to meet a mountain woman. (I
think I've managed to phrase that in a way that avoids the risk of
triggering the old joke.) In my travels I drove through the little town
of Stratford. I'm sure there's no need to tell anyone here the name of
the river that flows through that town.

[Chuck Riggs]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by HVS
-snip-

Post by Kalmia

Post by HVS

Post by Kalmia
By the way, isn't it 'offense"? Or is this the non-american
spelling? Just trying to learn, not condemn.

It's one of those pesky BrE/AmE spelling differences.

One of the factors making it more "pesky" - a word that's not normally
part of my vocabulary - is that I've now seen the "s" version so often
that it no longer looks wrong to me. That's a problem, because "looking
wrong" is my main defence against spelling errors.

Post by HVS

Post by Kalmia
This could be getting far afield, but are there differences between
BrE and Australian spellings? Seems they like to spell ladies as
ladys. No?

No. Unless, as James pointed out, your name is Gladies.
There are, I believe, one or two cases where AusE spelling does not
agree with BrE spelling, but they are so rar^H^H^H uncommon that I can't
think of an example.
There are certainly vocabulary differences. For example, I say "truck"
where a BrE speaker would say "lorry".

Instead of "jail", common in AmE, IrE and BrE, I believe "gaol" is
more common in AusE.

[Peter Moylan]

Post by Chuck Riggs
Instead of "jail", common in AmE, IrE and BrE, I believe "gaol" is
more common in AusE.

My third-grade spelling list [1] included "gaol/jail", as an indication
that both versions were in use.

That was umpty-ump years ago. "Gaol" is now obsolete in AusE.

[1] The first four words were "about, across, afternoon, air". It's
funny how some things can stick in your mind for years.

[annily]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Chuck Riggs
Instead of "jail", common in AmE, IrE and BrE, I believe "gaol" is
more common in AusE.

My third-grade spelling list [1] included "gaol/jail", as an indication
that both versions were in use.
That was umpty-ump years ago. "Gaol" is now obsolete in AusE.

Yes, except possibly for the names of some institutions.

[Peter Moylan]

Post by annily

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Chuck Riggs
Instead of "jail", common in AmE, IrE and BrE, I believe "gaol" is
more common in AusE.

My third-grade spelling list [1] included "gaol/jail", as an indication
that both versions were in use.
That was umpty-ump years ago. "Gaol" is now obsolete in AusE.

Yes, except possibly for the names of some institutions.

Well, yes. They can't be changed without moving the gaol-posts.

[Chuck Riggs]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by annily

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Chuck Riggs
Instead of "jail", common in AmE, IrE and BrE, I believe "gaol" is
more common in AusE.

My third-grade spelling list [1] included "gaol/jail", as an indication
that both versions were in use.
That was umpty-ump years ago. "Gaol" is now obsolete in AusE.

Yes, except possibly for the names of some institutions.

Well, yes. They can't be changed without moving the gaol-posts.

Nice joke, except isn't gaol pronounced the same way as jail? I'll
award you a good visual pun, though.

[Chuck Riggs]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Chuck Riggs
Instead of "jail", common in AmE, IrE and BrE, I believe "gaol" is
more common in AusE.

My third-grade spelling list [1] included "gaol/jail", as an indication
that both versions were in use.
That was umpty-ump years ago.

That's funny, you sound much, much younger than umpty-ump years old.

Post by Peter Moylan
"Gaol" is now obsolete in AusE.
[1] The first four words were "about, across, afternoon, air". It's
funny how some things can stick in your mind for years.

It is hard for me to believe that a word can become obsolete so
quickly. Disused, yes, but not obsolete.

[Peter Moylan]

Post by Chuck Riggs

Post by Peter Moylan
That was umpty-ump years ago.

That's funny, you sound much, much younger than umpty-ump years old.

I'm gaining an extra ump a month come yesterday. I try not to think
about it.

Post by Chuck Riggs

Post by Peter Moylan
"Gaol" is now obsolete in AusE.
[1] The first four words were "about, across, afternoon, air". It's
funny how some things can stick in your mind for years.

It is hard for me to believe that a word can become obsolete so
quickly. Disused, yes, but not obsolete.

Yes, perhaps "disused" is a better description. It's a word that we read
but don't write.

[annily]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Chuck Riggs

Post by Peter Moylan
That was umpty-ump years ago.

That's funny, you sound much, much younger than umpty-ump years old.

I'm gaining an extra ump a month come yesterday. I try not to think
about it.

Post by Chuck Riggs

Post by Peter Moylan
"Gaol" is now obsolete in AusE.
[1] The first four words were "about, across, afternoon, air". It's
funny how some things can stick in your mind for years.

It is hard for me to believe that a word can become obsolete so
quickly. Disused, yes, but not obsolete.

Yes, perhaps "disused" is a better description. It's a word that we read
but don't write.

What's the difference? When used in reference to words, both OED and
Macquarie suggest that obsolete and disused mean the same thing.

[Peter Moylan]

Post by annily

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Chuck Riggs

Post by Peter Moylan
That was umpty-ump years ago.

That's funny, you sound much, much younger than umpty-ump years old.

I'm gaining an extra ump a month come yesterday. I try not to think
about it.

Post by Chuck Riggs

Post by Peter Moylan
"Gaol" is now obsolete in AusE.
[1] The first four words were "about, across, afternoon, air". It's
funny how some things can stick in your mind for years.

It is hard for me to believe that a word can become obsolete so
quickly. Disused, yes, but not obsolete.

Yes, perhaps "disused" is a better description. It's a word that we read
but don't write.

What's the difference? When used in reference to words, both OED and
Macquarie suggest that obsolete and disused mean the same thing.

For me, "obsolete" carries a slight hint that the word has become
obscure. "Disused" suggests that, although we don't actively use the
word, we all understand it.

Or, to put it another way: "disused" suggests that we stopped using it
around 50 years ago, and "obsolete" means that we stopped using it a
couple of hundred years ago.

That might be just me, though. It's a subtle distinction.

[Chuck Riggs]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by annily

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Chuck Riggs

Post by Peter Moylan
That was umpty-ump years ago.

That's funny, you sound much, much younger than umpty-ump years old.

I'm gaining an extra ump a month come yesterday. I try not to think
about it.

Post by Chuck Riggs

Post by Peter Moylan
"Gaol" is now obsolete in AusE.
[1] The first four words were "about, across, afternoon, air". It's
funny how some things can stick in your mind for years.

It is hard for me to believe that a word can become obsolete so
quickly. Disused, yes, but not obsolete.

Yes, perhaps "disused" is a better description. It's a word that we read
but don't write.

What's the difference? When used in reference to words, both OED and
Macquarie suggest that obsolete and disused mean the same thing.

For me, "obsolete" carries a slight hint that the word has become
obscure. "Disused" suggests that, although we don't actively use the
word, we all understand it.
Or, to put it another way: "disused" suggests that we stopped using it
around 50 years ago, and "obsolete" means that we stopped using it a
couple of hundred years ago.
That might be just me, though. It's a subtle distinction.

It is.
To me, "disused" means rarely used and "obsolete" means there is no
longer a use for the word. I do not make the historical distinction
you seem to, by counting the number of years a word has not been
actively used. AFAIC, a word is or it is not "disused" or "obsolete"
in the present day.

[Chuck Riggs]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Chuck Riggs

Post by Peter Moylan
That was umpty-ump years ago.

That's funny, you sound much, much younger than umpty-ump years old.

I'm gaining an extra ump a month come yesterday. I try not to think
about it.

ObAUE: The expression, "a month come yesterday" confuses me. Because
it does, I don't know whether to wish you a belated happy birthday, or
not.

[Peter Duncanson (BrE)]

Post by Chuck Riggs

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Chuck Riggs

Post by Peter Moylan
That was umpty-ump years ago.

That's funny, you sound much, much younger than umpty-ump years old.

I'm gaining an extra ump a month come yesterday. I try not to think
about it.

ObAUE: The expression, "a month come yesterday" confuses me. Because
it does, I don't know whether to wish you a belated happy birthday, or
not.

I think there is a clue in "I'm gaining". That does not refer to the
past. It refers to the future as in "I'm buying a new pair of shoes on
Thursday" or "I'm getting a new car next month".

If Peter had written "I gained an extra ump a month come yesterday" a
belated (by a month and a day) "happy birthday" would have been in
order.

What he wrote "I'm gaining an extra ump a month come yesterday" refers
to an event a month less one day in the future.

[Peter Moylan]

Post by Chuck Riggs

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Chuck Riggs

Post by Peter Moylan
That was umpty-ump years ago.

That's funny, you sound much, much younger than umpty-ump years old.

I'm gaining an extra ump a month come yesterday. I try not to think
about it.

ObAUE: The expression, "a month come yesterday" confuses me. Because
it does, I don't know whether to wish you a belated happy birthday, or
not.

It was a joke, of course. "A month come yesterday" doesn't have any
meaning at all in standard English usage, because "come yesterday"
doesn't make sense. ("Come" clearly indicates the future, and
"yesterday" doesn't. Thus, the combination makes sense only to those
people who read time travel stories.)

My birthday is a month from now, minus one day. (Minus two days, given
my delay in replying.) Still, I wouldn't blame anyone who couldn't work
that out from what I wrote.

[Chuck Riggs]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Chuck Riggs

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by Chuck Riggs

Post by Peter Moylan
That was umpty-ump years ago.

That's funny, you sound much, much younger than umpty-ump years old.

I'm gaining an extra ump a month come yesterday. I try not to think
about it.

ObAUE: The expression, "a month come yesterday" confuses me. Because
it does, I don't know whether to wish you a belated happy birthday, or
not.

It was a joke, of course. "A month come yesterday" doesn't have any
meaning at all in standard English usage, because "come yesterday"
doesn't make sense. ("Come" clearly indicates the future, and
"yesterday" doesn't. Thus, the combination makes sense only to those
people who read time travel stories.)

Great joke.

Post by Peter Moylan
My birthday is a month from now, minus one day. (Minus two days, given
my delay in replying.) Still, I wouldn't blame anyone who couldn't work
that out from what I wrote.

Since they are not events I look forward to, I no longer announce my
own birthdays, but be my guest if you want to announce yours, perhaps
on the very day to keep things simple.

[Cheryl]

Post by Peter Duncanson (BrE)

Post by HVS
-snip-

Post by Kalmia

Post by HVS

Post by Kalmia
By the way, isn't it 'offense"? Or is this the non-american
spelling? Just trying to learn, not condemn.

It's one of those pesky BrE/AmE spelling differences.

This could be getting far afield, but are there differences between
BrE and Australian spellings? Seems they like to spell ladies as
ladys. No?

I can't speak for AusE, but I've never seen "ladys" in any standard
form of written English. (It looks like a form of "cute" spelling to
me -- similar to "ladees 'n' jennelmen".)

There is a place in Australia named Ladys Pass.
http://www.domain.com.au/Public/SuburbProfile.aspx?searchTerm=Ladys%20Pass&mode=research
I haven't been able to discover the origin of the name. It might be
Lady's with the apostrophe omitted. Apostrophes are often omitted from
place names. Queens, New York City, was named for Queen Catherine of
Braganza[1]. "Queens" is therefore the apostrophe-less possessive form
of "Queen".
A Google search for
"ladys" site:.au
finds many cases where "ladys" could be interpreted as the possessive
form of "lady" or as a possessive plural of "lady". In other instances
"ladys" is used as the plural of "lady".
http://adelaide.gumtree.com.au/c-Community-other-need-some-male-entertainment-for-a-ladys-only-party-W0QQAdIdZ171380124
hi there if your planning a ladys only party and want some wild fun
i can be your G string "or boxers" waiter and i do lap dances as
well ;) and i love to entertain ;) so contatct me if you like to
chat about a private party hens party what ever you like :)
CFNM is available as well :) so come on girls what are you waiting
for??????
So what if his spelling is a bit dodgy - he is not offering his services
as author or proofreader.
http://queens.about.com/od/queensalmanac/f/queens_name.htm

People who create maps and software programs for addresses don't like
apostrophes. They always want to remove them. The software writers
simply don't allow for their existence. When some site spits out "St.
John's" (possessive form, allegedly, like so many Canadian places, first
sighted or settled or something on St. John's Day) it's almost always
because whoever set the thing up doesn't think there are apostrophes in
place names.

Sometimes, they don't think there should be periods in place names, either.

Really, you'd think they'd find out the range of possibilities in place
names before developing their software or putting the names on their
maps, but no.

[Mark Brader]

Post by Cheryl
People who create maps and software programs for addresses don't like
apostrophes. They always want to remove them.

A couple of years ago I mentioned in email an alley in the shape of a
backwards L, connecting Bloor and Yonge Streets in downtown Toronto.
I wrote (slightly copyedited here):

This alley is named "Roy Square" on the street sign at its west
end, and on the exit signs in the subway station and in 33 Bloor
East; "Roy's Square" on the street sign at the north end, the
local-area maps in the subway station, and on MapArt, Pathfinder,
and Rand McNally street maps I have at home; "Roy's Square Mews"
on signs advertising the retailers along it; and "Roys Square" in
Google Maps!

Incidentally, Google Maps also had it in the wrong place. I haven't
checked lately.

But since I wrote that, not only have the apostrophe and the first S
disappeared, but so have all the other letters! A developer had bought
up the area containing the alley and demolished all the buildings to
start a new development, so the alley no longer exists. (At least,
it has no street signs any more. As of the last time I looked, at
least the west half is still there in the form of a walkway, as work
on the site was stopped by the recession and no actual construction
has begun.)

Post by Cheryl
The software writers
simply don't allow for their existence. When some site spits out "St.
John's" ... it's almost always because whoever set the thing up
doesn't think there are apostrophes in place names.

Couldn't bring yourself to misspell it? (Grin)

Post by Cheryl
Sometimes, they don't think there should be periods in place names, either.

Periods are for pikers. There is a village in Quebec with the funny
name of "St-Louis-du-Ha! Ha!". After attention was called to it in
a newsgroup thread some years ago, I looked it up in the index of my
1991 Rand McNally Road Atlas -- and found that it was listed there as
"St.-Louis-du-Ha90 Ha90". (The next year they got it right.)

[Garrett Wollman]

Post by Mark Brader
Periods are for pikers. There is a village in Quebec with the funny
name of "St-Louis-du-Ha! Ha!".

I've been there -- it's a little village on the Trans-Canada between
Edmundston (N.-B.) and Riviere-du-Loup. We stopped at the little
tourist information office by the side of the road and asked for an
explanation of the name, but I no longer remember it. (No jokes were
involved.)

I find that Google Maps has it as

Saint-Louis-du-Ha
! Ha!

(On that trip I drove from Boston to Syracuse and back by way of
Portland, Bangor, Bar Harbor, Calais, St. John, Charlottetown,
Moncton, Fredericton, Houlton, Presque Isle/Caribou, Madawaska/Fort
Kent[1], Riviere-du-Loup, Quebec City, Trois-Rivieres/Shawinigan,
Montreal, Ottawa, and Watertown. Can't do those long trips[2] any
more.)

-GAWollman

[1] My (Northern Maine Acadian) mother's ancestral home; there was a
family reunion that year.

[2] This trip was in the summer of 1998, and was the archetype for
further Big Trips, as we called them, until my traveling companion's
family responsibilities no longer allowed him to take off for sixteen
days at a time. The biggest of these trips was in 2001, which was
Boston to South Dakota, and back by way of Rochester, Erie, Fort
Wayne, Chicago, Rockford, Dubuque, Quad Cities, Cedar Rapids/Iowa
City, Des Moines, Ames, Fort Dodge, Sioux City, Sioux Falls,
Vermillion, Omaha, Pierre, Sioux Falls, North Platte, Grand Island,
Omaha, St. Joseph, Topeka, Kansas City, Columbia/Jeff. City,
St. Louis, Evansville, Louisville, Lexington, Cincinnati,
Akron/Canton, and Rochester, all in 16 days. (The double-dip in Omaha
was dropping my friend off at the family wedding he was supposed to be
attending, before heading back up to and all the way across South
Dakota, all in one very very long day.) I still haven't finished
organizing the photos from that trip.

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Post by Garrett Wollman

Post by Mark Brader
Periods are for pikers. There is a village in Quebec with the
funny name of "St-Louis-du-Ha! Ha!".

I've been there -- it's a little village on the Trans-Canada between
Edmundston (N.-B.) and Riviere-du-Loup. We stopped at the little
tourist information office by the side of the road and asked for an
explanation of the name, but I no longer remember it. (No jokes were
involved.)
I find that Google Maps has it as
Saint-Louis-du-Ha
! Ha!
(On that trip I drove from Boston to Syracuse and back by way of
Portland, Bangor, Bar Harbor, Calais, St. John, Charlottetown,
Moncton, Fredericton, Houlton, Presque Isle/Caribou, Madawaska/Fort
Kent[1], Riviere-du-Loup, Quebec City, Trois-Rivieres/Shawinigan,
Montreal, Ottawa, and Watertown. Can't do those long trips[2] any
more.)
-GAWollman
[1] My (Northern Maine Acadian) mother's ancestral home; there was a
family reunion that year.
[2] This trip was in the summer of 1998, and was the archetype for
further Big Trips, as we called them, until my traveling companion's
family responsibilities no longer allowed him to take off for sixteen
days at a time. The biggest of these trips was in 2001, which was
Boston to South Dakota, and back by way of Rochester, Erie, Fort
Wayne, Chicago, Rockford, Dubuque, Quad Cities, Cedar Rapids/Iowa
City, Des Moines, Ames, Fort Dodge, Sioux City, Sioux Falls,
Vermillion, Omaha, Pierre, Sioux Falls, North Platte, Grand Island,
Omaha, St. Joseph, Topeka, Kansas City, Columbia/Jeff. City,
St. Louis, Evansville, Louisville, Lexington, Cincinnati, Akron/
Canton, and Rochester, all in 16 days. (The double-dip in Omaha
was dropping my friend off at the family wedding he was supposed to
be attending, before heading back up to and all the way across South
Dakota, all in one very very long day.) I still haven't finished
organizing the photos from that trip.

Many thanks for again sharing your booooooooring life.

And here are a bunch of accents needed for the French-Canadian cities
and towns: ´ ´ ´ ´ ´ ` ` ` ` `.

[John Varela]

Post by Cheryl
People who create maps and software programs for addresses don't like
apostrophes. They always want to remove them. The software writers
simply don't allow for their existence.

I ran into that today when I wanted the GPS to take me to a store
called "Lowe's". There's no way to enter an apostrophe on the GPS. A
search for "Lowe" found nothing and a search for "Lowes" found a
store called "Lowest Price something-or-other". I had to find the
place on my own. Dooing so gave me a real feeling of independence
and of superiority to technology.

[Fred]

Post by HVS

Post by Kalmia

Post by HVS

fI promise - I searched this group as best I could, but
nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by
whether or not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case
of an abbreviation. I was filing some EOB's. OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one? "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark." Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.

The rules are not hard and fast.
Many people ridicule apostrophised plural abbreviations --
CD's, DVD's -- and although that practice does have a
respectable history, it's probably best to avoid it simply on
the grounds of least offence. (Those who get upset with the
apostrophe will appreciate seeing "CDs" and "DVDs", while those
who don't get upset won't object if it's left out.)
Single letters, on the other hand, take the apostrophe if
leaving it out could cause confusions: it's "Mind your p's and
q's", not "Mind your ps and qs". (In your example, it would be
"two A's in aardvark", but one could get away with writing
about "the three Rs".)

Agh - now I'm reeeaaaalllllly torn between the choices in your
three Rs example. : ))
By the way, isn't it 'offense"? Or is this the non-american
spelling? Just trying to learn, not condemn.

It's one of those pesky BrE/AmE spelling differences.

This could be getting far afield, but are there differences between
BrE and Australian spellings? Seems they like to spell ladies as
ladys. No?

No.

[James Hogg]

Post by Kalmia

Post by HVS

Post by Kalmia

Post by HVS

fI promise - I searched this group as best I could, but
nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by
whether or not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case
of an abbreviation. I was filing some EOB's. OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one? "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark." Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.

The rules are not hard and fast.
Many people ridicule apostrophised plural abbreviations --
CD's, DVD's -- and although that practice does have a
respectable history, it's probably best to avoid it simply on
the grounds of least offence. (Those who get upset with the
apostrophe will appreciate seeing "CDs" and "DVDs", while those
who don't get upset won't object if it's left out.)
Single letters, on the other hand, take the apostrophe if
leaving it out could cause confusions: it's "Mind your p's and
q's", not "Mind your ps and qs". (In your example, it would be
"two A's in aardvark", but one could get away with writing
about "the three Rs".)

Agh - now I'm reeeaaaalllllly torn between the choices in your
three Rs example. : ))
By the way, isn't it 'offense"? Or is this the non-american
spelling? Just trying to learn, not condemn.

It's one of those pesky BrE/AmE spelling differences.

This could be getting far afield, but are there differences between
BrE and Australian spellings? Seems they like to spell ladies as
ladys. No?
No.

I know one lady who spells her name Gladys.

[annily]

Post by Kalmia

Post by HVS

Post by Kalmia

Post by HVS

fI promise - I searched this group as best I could, but
nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by
whether or not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case
of an abbreviation. I was filing some EOB's. OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one? "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark." Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.

The rules are not hard and fast.
Many people ridicule apostrophised plural abbreviations --
CD's, DVD's -- and although that practice does have a
respectable history, it's probably best to avoid it simply on
the grounds of least offence. (Those who get upset with the
apostrophe will appreciate seeing "CDs" and "DVDs", while those
who don't get upset won't object if it's left out.)
Single letters, on the other hand, take the apostrophe if
leaving it out could cause confusions: it's "Mind your p's and
q's", not "Mind your ps and qs". (In your example, it would be
"two A's in aardvark", but one could get away with writing
about "the three Rs".)

Agh - now I'm reeeaaaalllllly torn between the choices in your
three Rs example. : ))
By the way, isn't it 'offense"? Or is this the non-american
spelling? Just trying to learn, not condemn.

It's one of those pesky BrE/AmE spelling differences.

This could be getting far afield, but are there differences between
BrE and Australian spellings? Seems they like to spell ladies as
ladys. No?

No.

[annily]

Post by Kalmia

Post by HVS

Post by Kalmia

Post by HVS

fI promise - I searched this group as best I could, but
nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by
whether or not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case
of an abbreviation. I was filing some EOB's. OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one? "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark." Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.

The rules are not hard and fast.
Many people ridicule apostrophised plural abbreviations --
CD's, DVD's -- and although that practice does have a
respectable history, it's probably best to avoid it simply on
the grounds of least offence. (Those who get upset with the
apostrophe will appreciate seeing "CDs" and "DVDs", while those
who don't get upset won't object if it's left out.)
Single letters, on the other hand, take the apostrophe if
leaving it out could cause confusions: it's "Mind your p's and
q's", not "Mind your ps and qs". (In your example, it would be
"two A's in aardvark", but one could get away with writing
about "the three Rs".)

Agh - now I'm reeeaaaalllllly torn between the choices in your
three Rs example. : ))
By the way, isn't it 'offense"? Or is this the non-american
spelling? Just trying to learn, not condemn.

It's one of those pesky BrE/AmE spelling differences.

This could be getting far afield, but are there differences between
BrE and Australian spellings? Seems they like to spell ladies as
ladys. No?

No.

To expand on that, there is a guy called "Rod Speed" who posts in aus.
newsgroups and does this with all words ending in "y", but he just likes
to be different. It certainly isn't typical of Australian English.

[Peter Moylan]

Post by annily

Post by Kalmia
This could be getting far afield, but are there differences between
BrE and Australian spellings? Seems they like to spell ladies as
ladys. No?

No.

To expand on that, there is a guy called "Rod Speed" who posts in aus.
newsgroups and does this with all words ending in "y", but he just likes
to be different. It certainly isn't typical of Australian English.

By and large, people who post to newsgroups are pretty weird.

[James Hogg]

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by annily

Post by Kalmia
This could be getting far afield, but are there differences between
BrE and Australian spellings? Seems they like to spell ladies as
ladys. No?

No.

To expand on that, there is a guy called "Rod Speed" who posts in aus.
newsgroups and does this with all words ending in "y", but he just likes
to be different. It certainly isn't typical of Australian English.

By and large, people who post to newsgroups are pretty weird.

But Rod is weird even by Usenet standards.

Did you ever come across RVI Seppo?

[Peter Moylan]

Post by James Hogg

Post by Peter Moylan

Post by annily

Post by Kalmia
This could be getting far afield, but are there differences between
BrE and Australian spellings? Seems they like to spell ladies as
ladys. No?

No.

To expand on that, there is a guy called "Rod Speed" who posts in aus.
newsgroups and does this with all words ending in "y", but he just likes
to be different. It certainly isn't typical of Australian English.

By and large, people who post to newsgroups are pretty weird.

But Rod is weird even by Usenet standards.
Did you ever come across RVI Seppo?

No; but then I don't read the Australian newsgroups, unless you count
the time when I used to read a group called something like
aus.jokes.tasteless. I gave up on the joke newsgroups once I realised
that I had already heard every joke in circulation.

[Jerry Friedman]

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by whether or
not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case of an abbreviation.
I was filing some EOB's.  OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one?  "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark."  Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.

I'd write it with an apostrophe, but I've seen apostrophe haters
recommend "There are three 'A's in aardvark", or the same with lower
case. I'm not sure whether that's in any style manuals.

--
Jerry Friedman

[Nick]

Post by Jerry Friedman

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by whether or
not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case of an abbreviation.
I was filing some EOB's.  OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one?  "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark."  Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.

I'd write it with an apostrophe, but I've seen apostrophe haters
recommend "There are three 'A's in aardvark", or the same with lower
case. I'm not sure whether that's in any style manuals.

I've certainly adopted that practice. Having programmed in C for far
too long I have a nasty habit of using different quotation marks around
single letters to those I put around words and quoted sentences.

It certainly seems entirely justifiable when quoting as in the aardvark
example - you're lifting the letter out of the word and refering to it
(exactly as in «there are three words beginning with "th" in this
sentence»). In "mind your 'p's and 'q's" it's less directly arguable,
as they aren't being quoted in any way, but that doesn't stop me using
it.

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.

[...]
(1) "I promise" is not the correct expression in this situation.
Perhaps it's a mistranslation from your native language (which is?).

Reason: "I promise" is a declaration assuring that one will or will not
do something *in the future*, thus it can't be used with "I searched" (past).

Better:
-- "I swear ...." (idiomatic; colloquial; very common)
-- "Trust me, ...." (idiomatic; very common)
-- "I assure you ...." (formal)

(2) "... as best I could, but nothing found." isn't quite kosher either.

Better:
"... as best AS I could, but found nothing."

(Someone will argue that "but nothing found" is elliptical.)

[Skitt]

Post by Reinhold {Rey} Aman

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.

[...]
(1) "I promise" is not the correct expression in this situation.
Perhaps it's a mistranslation from your native language (which is?).
Reason: "I promise" is a declaration assuring that one will or will not
do something *in the future*, thus it can't be used with "I searched" (past).
-- "I swear ...." (idiomatic; colloquial; very common)
-- "Trust me, ...." (idiomatic; very common)
-- "I assure you ...." (formal)
(2) "... as best I could, but nothing found." isn't quite kosher either.
"... as best AS I could, but found nothing."
(Someone will argue that "but nothing found" is elliptical.)

There are 3740 hits for "as best I could" in Google Books. One on the first
page of hits is from "As You Like It", by Shakespeare. It might fall under
the "idiom" classification, I think.

[Kalmia]

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.

[...]
(1)  "I promise" is not the correct expression in this situation.
Perhaps it's a mistranslation from your native language (which is?).
Reason:  "I promise" is a declaration assuring that one will or will
not
do something *in the future*, thus it can't be used with "I searched" (past).
-- "I swear ...." (idiomatic; colloquial; very common)
-- "Trust me, ...." (idiomatic; very common)
-- "I assure you ...." (formal)
(2)  "... as best I could, but nothing found." isn't quite kosher
either.
"... as best AS I could, but found nothing."
(Someone will argue that "but nothing found" is elliptical.)

There are 3740 hits for "as best I could" in Google Books.  One on the first
page of hits is from "As You Like It", by Shakespeare.  It might fall under
the "idiom" classification, I think.
--
Skitt (AmE)

Whew - now I can sleep tonight.

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Kalmia wrote:
[...]

Post by Kalmia
Whew - now I can sleep tonight.

You're welcome.

[Kalmia]

Post by Reinhold {Rey} Aman
[...]

Post by Kalmia
Whew - now I can sleep tonight.

You're welcome.
--t
~~~ Reinhold {Rey} Aman ~~~

Uhhh, my reply was to Skitt for finding those three thousand plus
instances. But, take credit if it makes you feel good.

[John O'Flaherty]

On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 11:49:15 -0800, Reinhold {Rey} Aman

Post by Reinhold {Rey} Aman

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.

[...]
(1) "I promise" is not the correct expression in this situation.
Perhaps it's a mistranslation from your native language (which is?).
Reason: "I promise" is a declaration assuring that one will or will not
do something *in the future*, thus it can't be used with "I searched" (past).
-- "I swear ...." (idiomatic; colloquial; very common)
-- "Trust me, ...." (idiomatic; very common)
-- "I assure you ...." (formal)
(2) "... as best I could, but nothing found." isn't quite kosher either.
"... as best AS I could, but found nothing."
(Someone will argue that "but nothing found" is elliptical.)

"As best I could" sounds right to me, as a rearrangement of "as I
could best". If using the other expression, I would say "as well as I
could", since "best" doesn't logically admit degrees.

[Kalmia]

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.

[...]
(1)  "I promise" is not the correct expression in this situation.
Perhaps it's a mistranslation from your native language (which is?).

UH, lemme think. New Englandese is my native tongue. I can drop the
r's as well as the next guy.

Reason:  "I promise" is a declaration assuring that one will or will not
do something *in the future*, thus it can't be used with "I searched" (past).
-- "I swear ...." (idiomatic; colloquial; very common)
-- "Trust me, ...." (idiomatic; very common)
-- "I assure you ...." (formal)
(2)  "... as best I could, but nothing found." isn't quite kosher either.

Do I at least get credit for my meter?

"... as best AS I could, but found nothing."
(Someone will argue that "but nothing found" is elliptical.)

How about "I promise (you)....", meaning "I guarantee"? Still not
kosher? : ))

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Post by Kalmia

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but
nothing found.

[...]
(1) "I promise" is not the correct expression in this
situation. Perhaps it's a mistranslation from your native
language (which is?).

UH, lemme think. New Englandese is my native tongue. I can
drop the r's as well as the next guy.

Please be careful when dropping your r's; you could hurt your coccyx.

Post by Kalmia

Reason:  "I promise" is a declaration assuring that one will or
will not do something *in the future*, thus it can't be used
with "I searched" (past).
-- "I swear ...." (idiomatic; colloquial; very common)
-- "Trust me, ...." (idiomatic; very common)
-- "I assure you ...." (formal)
(2) "... as best I could, but nothing found." isn't quite
kosher either.

Do I at least get credit for my meter?

Okay, *some* credit for your iambic meter, maid. However, reading your
line feels somewhat like an unsatisfying _coitus interruptus_ because it
lacks a finishing, orgasmic iamb (- /):

- / - / - / - / - / - /
I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.

Adding another iambus (e.g., "so far") changes it to
near-Hoggian-quality poetry:

I searched this group
As best I could,
But nothing found
So far.

Extra credit for your "group" - "could" assonance, though.

Post by Kalmia

"... as best AS I could, but found nothing."
(Someone will argue that "but nothing found" is elliptical.)

How about "I promise (you)....", meaning "I guarantee"?
Still not kosher? : ))

"I guarantee" would have been acceptable; "I promise (you)...." is not,
because it implies some *future* action.

--
/ - / -
~~~ Trochaic Reinhold {Rey} Aman ~~~

[Peter Moylan]

Post by Reinhold {Rey} Aman

Post by Kalmia

(2) "... as best I could, but nothing found." isn't quite
kosher either.

Do I at least get credit for my meter?

Okay, *some* credit for your iambic meter, maid. However, reading your
line feels somewhat like an unsatisfying _coitus interruptus_ because it
- / - / - / - / - / - /
I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.
Adding another iambus (e.g., "so far") changes it to
I searched this group
As best I could,
But nothing found
So far.

At the risk of reviving a now-defunct thread, we could try:

I searched, I promise,
Googled high and googled low.
Still no f'n eye deer.

[James Hogg]

Post by Reinhold {Rey} Aman

Post by Kalmia

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.

[...] (1) "I promise" is not the correct expression in this
situation. Perhaps it's a mistranslation from your native
language (which is?).

UH, lemme think. New Englandese is my native tongue. I can drop
the r's as well as the next guy.

Please be careful when dropping your r's; you could hurt your coccyx.

Post by Kalmia

Reason: "I promise" is a declaration assuring that one will or
will not do something *in the future*, thus it can't be used with
"I searched" (past).
Better: -- "I swear ...." (idiomatic; colloquial; very common) --
"Trust me, ...." (idiomatic; very common) -- "I assure you ...."
(formal)
(2) "... as best I could, but nothing found." isn't quite kosher
either.

Do I at least get credit for my meter?

Okay, *some* credit for your iambic meter, maid. However, reading
your line feels somewhat like an unsatisfying _coitus interruptus_
- / - / - / - / - / - / I searched
this group as best I could, but nothing found.
Adding another iambus (e.g., "so far") changes it to
I searched this group As best I could, But nothing found So far.
Extra credit for your "group" - "could" assonance, though.

Post by Kalmia

Better: "... as best AS I could, but found nothing."
(Someone will argue that "but nothing found" is elliptical.)

How about "I promise (you)....", meaning "I guarantee"? Still not
kosher? : ))

"I guarantee" would have been acceptable; "I promise (you)...." is
not, because it implies some *future* action.

In future we expect newbies to present their queries in rhymed verse and
to state their native tongue or variant of English, something like this:

I searched this group as best I could
(of that you have my guarantees)
but nothing found in my attempt
to ascertain if EOBs
and other terms to label files
perchance require apostrophes
just as those "A's in aardvark" do
(my native tongue: New Englandese).

[Kalmia]

Post by James Hogg

Post by Reinhold {Rey} Aman

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.

[...] (1) "I promise" is not the correct expression in this
situation.  Perhaps it's a mistranslation from your native
language (which is?).

UH, lemme think.  New Englandese is my native tongue.  I can drop
the r's as well as the next guy.

Please be careful when dropping your r's; you could hurt your coccyx.

Reason:  "I promise" is a declaration assuring that one will or
will not do something *in the future*, thus it can't be used with
"I searched" (past).
Better: -- "I swear ...." (idiomatic; colloquial; very common) --
"Trust me, ...." (idiomatic; very common) -- "I assure you ...."
(formal)
(2) "... as best I could, but nothing found." isn't quite kosher
either.

Do I at least get credit for my meter?

Okay, *some* credit for your iambic meter, maid.  However, reading
your line feels somewhat like an unsatisfying _coitus interruptus_
-     /      -    /   -   /   -   /     -    /  -    / I searched
this group as best I could, but nothing found.
Adding another iambus (e.g., "so far") changes it to
I searched this group As best I could, But nothing found So far.
Extra credit for your "group" - "could" assonance, though.

Better: "... as best AS I could, but found nothing."
(Someone will argue that "but nothing found" is elliptical.)

How about "I promise (you)....",  meaning "I guarantee"? Still not
kosher?  : ))

"I guarantee" would have been acceptable; "I promise (you)...." is
not, because it implies some *future* action.

In future we expect newbies to present their queries in rhymed verse and
I searched this group as best I could
(of that you have my guarantees)
but nothing found in my attempt
to ascertain if EOBs
and other terms to label files
perchance require apostrophes
just as those "A's in aardvark" do
(my native tongue: New Englandese).
--
James

Superb-o.


I doff my bonnet
for that near-sonnet.

[Chuck Riggs]

On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 19:34:56 -0800 (PST), Kalmia

Post by Kalmia

Post by James Hogg

Post by Reinhold {Rey} Aman

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.

[...] (1) "I promise" is not the correct expression in this
situation.  Perhaps it's a mistranslation from your native
language (which is?).

UH, lemme think.  New Englandese is my native tongue.  I can drop
the r's as well as the next guy.

Please be careful when dropping your r's; you could hurt your coccyx.

Reason:  "I promise" is a declaration assuring that one will or
will not do something *in the future*, thus it can't be used with
"I searched" (past).
Better: -- "I swear ...." (idiomatic; colloquial; very common) --
"Trust me, ...." (idiomatic; very common) -- "I assure you ...."
(formal)
(2) "... as best I could, but nothing found." isn't quite kosher
either.

Do I at least get credit for my meter?

Okay, *some* credit for your iambic meter, maid.  However, reading
your line feels somewhat like an unsatisfying _coitus interruptus_
-     /      -    /   -   /   -   /     -    /  -    / I searched
this group as best I could, but nothing found.
Adding another iambus (e.g., "so far") changes it to
I searched this group As best I could, But nothing found So far.
Extra credit for your "group" - "could" assonance, though.

Better: "... as best AS I could, but found nothing."
(Someone will argue that "but nothing found" is elliptical.)

How about "I promise (you)....",  meaning "I guarantee"? Still not
kosher?  : ))

"I guarantee" would have been acceptable; "I promise (you)...." is
not, because it implies some *future* action.

In future we expect newbies to present their queries in rhymed verse and

We?

Post by Kalmia

Post by James Hogg
I searched this group as best I could
(of that you have my guarantees)
but nothing found in my attempt
to ascertain if EOBs
and other terms to label files
perchance require apostrophes
just as those "A's in aardvark" do
(my native tongue: New Englandese).
--
James

Superb-o.
I doff my bonnet
for that near-sonnet.

James may have received help from his mouse.

[James Hogg]

This post is a test to see how line breaks are now handled.

Post by Reinhold {Rey} Aman
Okay, *some* credit for your iambic meter, maid. However, reading your
line feels somewhat like an unsatisfying _coitus interruptus_ because it
- / - / - / - / - / - /
I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.
Adding another iambus (e.g., "so far") changes it to
I searched this group
As best I could,
But nothing found
So far.
Extra credit for your "group" - "could" assonance, though.

If this works properly it is thanks to Peter.

[James Hogg]

Post by James Hogg
This post is a test to see how line breaks are now handled.

Post by Reinhold {Rey} Aman
Okay, *some* credit for your iambic meter, maid. However, reading your
line feels somewhat like an unsatisfying _coitus interruptus_ because it
- / - / - / - / - / - /
I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.
Adding another iambus (e.g., "so far") changes it to
I searched this group
As best I could,
But nothing found
So far.
Extra credit for your "group" - "could" assonance, though.

If this works properly it is thanks to Peter.

Looks OK, doesn't it?

[James Hogg]

Post by James Hogg

Post by James Hogg
This post is a test to see how line breaks are now handled.

Post by Reinhold {Rey} Aman
Okay, *some* credit for your iambic meter, maid. However,
reading your line feels somewhat like an unsatisfying _coitus
- / - / - / - / - / - / I searched
this group as best I could, but nothing found.
Adding another iambus (e.g., "so far") changes it to
I searched this group As best I could, But nothing found So far.
Extra credit for your "group" - "could" assonance, though.

If this works properly it is thanks to Peter.

Looks OK, doesn't it?

But see what happens when I use the command Edit Rewrap. Maybe I should
avoid that in future.

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Post by James Hogg

Post by James Hogg

Post by James Hogg
This post is a test to see how line breaks are now handled.

Post by Reinhold {Rey} Aman
Okay, *some* credit for your iambic meter, maid. However,
reading your line feels somewhat like an unsatisfying _coitus
- / - / - / - / - / - / I searched
this group as best I could, but nothing found.
Adding another iambus (e.g., "so far") changes it to
I searched this group As best I could, But nothing found So far.
Extra credit for your "group" - "could" assonance, though.

If this works properly it is thanks to Peter.

Looks OK, doesn't it?

But see what happens when I use the command Edit Rewrap.
Maybe I should avoid that in future.

Yup, this one looks bad. Distorted as before.

[Peter Moylan]

Post by James Hogg

Post by James Hogg

Post by James Hogg
This post is a test to see how line breaks are now handled.

Post by Reinhold {Rey} Aman
Okay, *some* credit for your iambic meter, maid. However,
reading your line feels somewhat like an unsatisfying _coitus
- / - / - / - / - / - / I searched
this group as best I could, but nothing found.
Adding another iambus (e.g., "so far") changes it to
I searched this group As best I could, But nothing found So far.
Extra credit for your "group" - "could" assonance, though.

If this works properly it is thanks to Peter.

Looks OK, doesn't it?

But see what happens when I use the command Edit Rewrap. Maybe I should
avoid that in future.

There's even a trick to make that work. If you highlight a block of text
before rewrapping, only the highlighted part is rewrapped.

Even better, Thunderbird has an Edit/Undo menu item. That's a feature I
use in a great many programs.

[Peter Moylan]

Post by Peter Moylan
Even better, Thunderbird has an Edit/Undo menu item. That's a feature I
use in a great many programs.

That, of course, has become a feature of many software products. The
programmers have correctly deduced that this is an "absolutely must
have" feature, and in a rare departure from the "more glitz, less
function" trend they've given it to us.

It would be a major boost to the Intelligent Design theory if someone
discovered that we humans had an "Undo" button for some of the decisions
we've made.

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

Post by James Hogg

Post by James Hogg
This post is a test to see how line breaks are now handled.

Post by Reinhold {Rey} Aman
Okay, *some* credit for your iambic meter, maid. However, reading your
line feels somewhat like an unsatisfying _coitus interruptus_ because it
- / - / - / - / - / - /
I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.
Adding another iambus (e.g., "so far") changes it to
I searched this group
As best I could,
But nothing found
So far.
Extra credit for your "group" - "could" assonance, though.

If this works properly it is thanks to Peter.

Looks OK, doesn't it?

Yes, this reply and the preceding one are perfect!
Thank you very much, Peter and James.

[Amethyst Deceiver]

On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 11:49:15 -0800, Reinhold {Rey} Aman

Post by Reinhold {Rey} Aman

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.

[...]
(1) "I promise" is not the correct expression in this situation.
Perhaps it's a mistranslation from your native language (which is?).
Reason: "I promise" is a declaration assuring that one will or will not
do something *in the future*, thus it can't be used with "I searched" (past).
-- "I swear ...." (idiomatic; colloquial; very common)
-- "Trust me, ...." (idiomatic; very common)
-- "I assure you ...." (formal)
(2) "... as best I could, but nothing found." isn't quite kosher either.
"... as best AS I could, but found nothing."

"As best I could" is perfectly good BrE. The "nothing found" isn't
standard though.

[Reinhold {Rey} Aman]

[...]

Post by Amethyst Deceiver

Post by Reinhold {Rey} Aman
(2) "... as best I could, but nothing found." isn't quite
kosher either.
"... as best AS I could, but found nothing."

"As best I could" is perfectly good BrE. The "nothing found"
isn't standard though.

Google hits found right after my reply to Kalmia:

16,200,000 = as best I could

6,150,000 = as best as I could

Thus my "better" version isn't really better, just less common.

[Redshade]

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by whether or
not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case of an abbreviation.
I was filing some EOB's.  OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one?  "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark."  Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.
Thanks,
Kalmia

It is a much debated point as the discussion will attest. The
proliferation of acronyms postdates the scribblings of the Victorian
uber-grammarians and is thus as open to interpretation as their often
dubious proclamations.
Seriously folks my own take on this is to regurgitate old opinions
thus: "Sixties" does not have an erroneous apostrophe so neither
should 60s.
Compact Discs=CDs.
"There are three As" may cause momentary confusion but no more than a
lot of other irregularities in the English language.
The capital "A" followed by a lower case "s" should be understood by
most people.
If you are really so precious you would say " (t)here are three
letter As...".

[James Hogg]

Post by Redshade

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by whether or
not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case of an abbreviation.
I was filing some EOB's. OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one? "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark." Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.
Thanks,
Kalmia

It is a much debated point as the discussion will attest. The
proliferation of acronyms postdates the scribblings of the Victorian
uber-grammarians and is thus as open to interpretation as their often
dubious proclamations.
Seriously folks my own take on this is to regurgitate old opinions
thus: "Sixties" does not have an erroneous apostrophe so neither
should 60s.
Compact Discs=CDs.
"There are three As" may cause momentary confusion but no more than a
lot of other irregularities in the English language.
The capital "A" followed by a lower case "s" should be understood by
most people.
If you are really so precious you would say " (t)here are three
letter As...".

The word "aardvark" has as many as as "illicit" has is and "untruthful"
has us.

[Richard Bollard]

Post by James Hogg

Post by Redshade

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by whether or
not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case of an abbreviation.
I was filing some EOB's. OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one? "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark." Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.
Thanks,
Kalmia

It is a much debated point as the discussion will attest. The
proliferation of acronyms postdates the scribblings of the Victorian
uber-grammarians and is thus as open to interpretation as their often
dubious proclamations.
Seriously folks my own take on this is to regurgitate old opinions
thus: "Sixties" does not have an erroneous apostrophe so neither
should 60s.
Compact Discs=CDs.
"There are three As" may cause momentary confusion but no more than a
lot of other irregularities in the English language.
The capital "A" followed by a lower case "s" should be understood by
most people.
If you are really so precious you would say " (t)here are three
letter As...".

The word "aardvark" has as many as as "illicit" has is and "untruthful"
has us.

No fair. You gotta use upper case.

The word "aardvark" has as many As as "illicit" has Is and
"untruthful" has Us.

[Peter Duncanson (BrE)]

On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 15:58:53 -0800 (PST), Redshade

Post by Redshade

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by whether or
not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case of an abbreviation.
I was filing some EOB's.  OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one?  "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark."  Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.
Thanks,
Kalmia

It is a much debated point as the discussion will attest. The
proliferation of acronyms postdates the scribblings of the Victorian
uber-grammarians and is thus as open to interpretation as their often
dubious proclamations.
Seriously folks my own take on this is to regurgitate old opinions
thus: "Sixties" does not have an erroneous apostrophe so neither
should 60s.
Compact Discs=CDs.
"There are three As" may cause momentary confusion but no more than a
lot of other irregularities in the English language.
The capital "A" followed by a lower case "s" should be understood by
most people.
If you are really so precious you would say " (t)here are three
letter As...".

If been wondering about " (t)here are three letters A...".

[Frank ess]

Post by Redshade

Post by Kalmia
I promise - I searched this group as best I could, but nothing found.
I was labeling some files the new year, and was bugged by whether
or not to use that overworked apostrophe in the case of an
abbreviation. I was filing some EOB's. OR, it is EOBs?
What about this one? "There are three A's (or is it As) in
aardvark." Somehow, I realllly want that apost in that case.
Thanks,
Kalmia

It is a much debated point as the discussion will attest. The
proliferation of acronyms postdates the scribblings of the Victorian
uber-grammarians and is thus as open to interpretation as their
often dubious proclamations.
Seriously folks my own take on this is to regurgitate old opinions
thus: "Sixties" does not have an erroneous apostrophe so neither
should 60s.
Compact Discs=CDs.
"There are three As" may cause momentary confusion but no more
than a lot of other irregularities in the English language.
The capital "A" followed by a lower case "s" should be understood by
most people.
If you are really so precious you would say " (t)here are three
letter As...".

While you are at it, bring me another moose.