LGTrotter wrote: ↑21:06 Fri 03 Mar 2017
Oh here you go, a link
I was thinking that the undergraduate in the first story complained of having his Cockburn 04 drunk by the rowing club. Published in 1933 that would make it just about thirty, an 85 in todays money.
"The first duty of Port is to be red" Ernest H. Cockburn
LGTrotter wrote: ↑17:48 Sat 11 Mar 2017By the way, do we have any feedback on Ms Robinson's views? (I feared another correction should I attempt the apostrophe on her first name)
Mention is hereby made of the absence of punctuation at the end of the bracketed sentence.
LGTrotter wrote: ↑17:48 Sat 11 Mar 2017By the way, do we have any feedback on Ms Robinson's views? (I feared another correction should I attempt the apostrophe on her first name)
Mention is hereby made of the absence of punctuation at the end of the bracketed sentence.
I thought I was tying my shoelaces carefully but it seems I was only tying them together. I realise I should know this but would I have been OK with 'Jancis's on this occasion? I also wonder how I would refer to more than one Jancis with a possessive apostrophe.
Brackets, gawdelpus. I realise 'parentheses' takes longer to write but I think it is more accurate, and elegant.
PhilW wrote: ↑21:32 Wed 29 Mar 2017I've rarely seen such a shoddy pile of festering shabbiness, a catastrophic display of inept and cankerous disdain, a disgusting mess which... oh hold on, you said critiqued, not criticised, I'm terribly sorry. Hmm, critiqued or praised, err... Yes, they're lovely, very good show.
I think he meant “cantankerous”. Also, an ellipsis should be a single character (“…”) rather than three dots (“...”).
PhilW wrote: ↑21:32 Wed 29 Mar 2017I've rarely seen such a shoddy pile of festering shabbiness, a catastrophic display of inept and cankerous disdain, a disgusting mess which... oh hold on, you said critiqued, not criticised, I'm terribly sorry. Hmm, critiqued or praised, err... Yes, they're lovely, very good show.
I think he meant “cantankerous”. Also, an ellipsis should be a single character (“…”) rather than three dots (“...”).
I meant cankerous; cantankerous would have worked, though would have been less pustulent.
Not all input devices support entry of ellipsis as single character - if that latter is a crime, I may be a regular repeat offender...
9/10 for me. Did not know that you add 's to plural nouns that do not end in s (men's team). Did get Jesus' crash helmet, but only because it looked correct and not because I knew the rule. Going by modern standards it should have been Jesus's crash helmet.
Glenn E. wrote: ↑20:13 Mon 29 May 2017Going by modern standards it should have been Jesus's crash helmet.
Modern standard presumably meaning since around 1715. The St James's district of London has been so named since early Hanoverian times.
I love the English language. There are so many twists and foibles to it that trip up mother-tongue English speakers. I feel sorry for people for whom English is a second language - and usually in awe of their linguistic capabilities.
Top Ports in 2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.
2025: Quevedo 1972 Colheita, b.2024. Just as good as Niepoort 1900!
Glenn E. wrote: ↑20:13 Mon 29 May 2017Going by modern standards it should have been Jesus's crash helmet.
Modern standard presumably meaning since around 1715. The St James's district of London has been so named since early Hanoverian times.
When compared to biblical times? Yes, that suffices as modern.
There have always been exceptions and still are, but I believe the general switch to 's on a noun that ends in s is more recent than 1715. I was taught to base the decision on how the word is pronounced, so even in the 1970s the change was still underway. At least in rural Nebraska.
Glenn E. wrote: ↑20:13 Mon 29 May 2017
9/10 for me. Did not know that you add 's to plural nouns that do not end in s (men's team). Did get Jesus' crash helmet, but only because it looked correct and not because I knew the rule. Going by modern standards it should have been Jesus's crash helmet.
Meh. 9/10 also. I was happy enough with Jesus and his helmet, but disagreed with Richard Harris and his spats (You might say Denn-is-is but you write Dennis', so why different with surname than with first name, since both are proper nouns?)
Glenn E. wrote: ↑20:13 Mon 29 May 2017
9/10 for me. Did not know that you add 's to plural nouns that do not end in s (men's team). Did get Jesus' crash helmet, but only because it looked correct and not because I knew the rule. Going by modern standards it should have been Jesus's crash helmet.
Meh. 9/10 also. I was happy enough with Jesus and his helmet, but disagreed with Richard Harris and his spats (You might say Denn-is-is but you write Dennis', so why different with surname than with first name, since both are proper nouns?)
My understanding is that currently, Dennis's and Harris's are the correct forms. The odd (per modern standards) use of Jesus' is due to the fact that it is a biblical figure. Which, of course, means that St. James's makes no sense. Because English.
AHB wrote: ↑18:05 Sun 04 Jun 2017Find the ASCII codes for me for an em-dash (and an ellipsis) and I will gladly use the correct punctuation. Until then, I will continue to be lazy.
From memory: 0151 = “—”; 0133 = “…”. And curly quotation marks are 0145-0148.
On a Windows PC, if you hold down the Alt key and type the number in question on the numeric keypad, the character in question will appear when you release the Alt key. That's why the preceding '0' for the em-dash is necessary.
Glenn E. wrote: ↑22:16 Sun 04 Jun 2017
On a Windows PC, if you hold down the Alt key and type the number in question on the numeric keypad, the character in question will appear when you release the Alt key. That's why the preceding '0' for the em-dash is necessary.
This is what you get with the preceding 0: —
This is what you get without it: ù
It's magic!
Top Ports in 2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.
2025: Quevedo 1972 Colheita, b.2024. Just as good as Niepoort 1900!
Glenn E. wrote: ↑22:16 Sun 04 Jun 2017
On a Windows PC, if you hold down the Alt key and type the number in question on the numeric keypad, the character in question will appear when you release the Alt key. That's why the preceding '0' for the em-dash is necessary.
Ah OK. Was aware of that little shortcut on Windows, but was wondering if there was some way of doing that on a mobile device…
Glenn E. wrote: ↑19:48 Mon 05 Jun 2017
On Android using the Google Keyboard, switch to number input (hit the ?123 button) then hold down the hyphen to see other options.
Glenn E. wrote: ↑19:48 Mon 05 Jun 2017
On Android using the Google Keyboard, switch to number input (hit the ?123 button) then hold down the hyphen to see other options.
Andy Velebil wrote: ↑20:11 Wed 14 Jun 2017
The "hills" by my house are over 4,000' (~ 13,000 meters).
Math is hard.
Hahha. One too many zeros on that. Damn phone. 1,300 meters. That better?
And the peaks behind that are higher. Though I think Eric in Colorado has us all beat at over 10,000 foot peaks there. Though I have skied at about 13,000 feet in Telluride Colorado and breathing during exertion gets a bit tougher at that elevation
I've skied at 12,000' in Colorado (Crested Butte). Yeah, the last couple thousand feet make a big difference. Most of the resort is between 9000' and 10,500', but if you go up top and take a couple of those black runs you'll be gasping for breath in no time.
Glenn E. wrote: ↑04:05 Thu 15 Jun 2017
Mt. Rainier is 14,411.
I've skied at 12,000' in Colorado (Crested Butte). Yeah, the last couple thousand feet make a big difference. Most of the resort is between 9000' and 10,500', but if you go up top and take a couple of those black runs you'll be gasping for breath in no time.
That's nothing; when I was a lad our parents would make my brother and I go t'top of Mount Everest before breakfast, with no Oxygen, or ice axes - or shoes; have a boxing match on the summit and t'loser had to carry t'winner back down while singing God save the Queen, and if we didn't do it quick enough they made us dig our own graves, bury ourselves, and then they would dance on our graves singing Hallelujah. TPF members of today think they have it tough, pah!
Glenn E. wrote: ↑04:05 Thu 15 Jun 2017
Mt. Rainier is 14,411.
I've skied at 12,000' in Colorado (Crested Butte). Yeah, the last couple thousand feet make a big difference. Most of the resort is between 9000' and 10,500', but if you go up top and take a couple of those black runs you'll be gasping for breath in no time.
That's nothing; when I was a lad our parents would make my brother and I go t'top of Mount Everest before breakfast, with no Oxygen, or ice axes - or shoes; have a boxing match on the summit and t'loser had to carry t'winner back down while singing God save the Queen, and if we didn't do it quick enough they made us dig our own graves, bury ourselves, and then they would dance on our graves singing Hallelujah. TPF members of today think they have it tough, pah!
Glenn E. wrote: ↑04:05 Thu 15 Jun 2017skied at 12,000' in Colorado
Phil’s reprimand was good, and, generously, he even left an error for others to spot. In a thread entitled ‘Apostrophe crimes’ everybody will have noticed Glenn’s incorrect use of a straight single quote (“'”, U+0027) rather than the prime symbol (“′”, U+2032). Tut tut.
idj123 wrote: ↑17:12 Sun 18 Feb 2018Yes please! Does OBV count as an 'awful shipper's?
Flash is being hard. In the first post of that thread the theme had included the requirement “no awful shippers”. It could be that Ian was trying to quote, to copy the pluralisation of the original, whilst recognising that the new grammatical context required a singular. It was done clumsily, but I would not have rebuked this — indeed, didn’t.
This was typographical rather than grammatical with the second quotation mark inadvertently being inserted before the 's' rather than after and thus becoming an unintentional apostrophe.
flash_uk wrote: ↑16:25 Sun 11 Mar 2018I think it would be better to claim that autocorrect inserted the s at the end, as the presence of “an” means shipper must be singular.
jdaw1 wrote: ↑14:56 Sat 10 Mar 2018In the first post of that thread the theme had included the requirement “no awful shippers”. It could be that Ian was trying to quote, to copy the pluralisation of the original
flash_uk wrote: ↑16:25 Sun 11 Mar 2018I think it would be better to claim that autocorrect inserted the s at the end, as the presence of “an” means shipper must be singular.
jdaw1 wrote: ↑14:56 Sat 10 Mar 2018In the first post of that thread the theme had included the requirement “no awful shippers”. It could be that Ian was trying to quote, to copy the pluralisation of the original
Yes "no awful shippers" in the first post, but if one then discusses a single bottle, the question would be is it "an awful shipper". Can't have "an awful shippers".
Yes, I agree, the sentence could have tortured a bit (“would OBV breach “no awful shippers”?”), but I sufficiently sympathetic to the mixed pluralisation from the quotation.
I think this is debateable. I would have said " readers' " but each of the many true stories would have come from a single individual reader. If that was the case, would the use have been acceptable?
Top Ports in 2024: Niepoort 1900 Colheita, b.1971. A near perfect Port.
2025: Quevedo 1972 Colheita, b.2024. Just as good as Niepoort 1900!
AHB wrote: ↑11:59 Tue 03 Apr 2018I think this is debateable. I would have said " readers' " but each of the many true stories would have come from a single individual reader. If that was the case, would the use have been acceptable?
Unless a single reader supplied all the stories, it’s wrong. Compare: the boys’ oranges: each boy allocated on orange, still, multiple boys.
Consistent with:
jdaw1 wrote: ↑21:50 Sat 31 Mar 2018It is very unlikely that this is correct
Kim Newton wrote:My dads sisters daughters boyfriend’s sister works in at bewicks and she says its true, she thinks she heard 2 councillors discussing it over chocolate chip muffins.
"The first duty of Port is to be red" Ernest H. Cockburn