Apostrophe crimes

[jdaw1]

Photographed in Portree, Skye, on Wednesday 4^th December 2013.

[SCP-DFF]

Gimme a break. That's ridiculous, Cheri.

[DRT]

Gimme a break. That's ridiculous, Cheri.

I disagree. I think JDAW has been very diligent.

[jdaw1]

Gimme a break. That's ridiculous, Cheri.

I disagree. I think JDAW has been very diligent.

Taking a husband’s side against the wife: danger danger bear.

[DRT]

Gimme a break. That's ridiculous, Cheri.

I disagree. I think JDAW has been very diligent.

Taking a husband’s side against the wife: danger danger bear.

T'wasn't me. Someone must have stolen my login details.

[LGTrotter]

Gimme a break. That's ridiculous, Cheri.

I disagree. I think JDAW has been very diligent.

I tried to warn you, a swot and a teacher's pet.

[SCP-DFF]

The problem is that Julian hasn't actually given me a good reason for why it's incorrect.

[jdaw1]

The problem is that Julian hasn't actually given me a good reason for why it's incorrect.

Compare and contrast:
• Fine ales from Isle of Skye
• Fine ales from ‘Isle of Skye’
What is the purpose of the quotation marks in the latter? I could have understood ‟Fine Isle-of-Skye ales”, as a compound adjective, but with the current arrangement of the words, the compounding is wrong.

[jdaw1]

Not an apostrophe crime, but offensive to those who see these things.

"We found that nearly half of the co-educational state-funded schools we looked are actually doing worse than average," explained Clare Thomson, curriculum and diversity manager at the Institute of Physics.

There are at least three things to notice, two of which amusingly clash with what the article is promoting.

[PhilW]

Not an apostrophe crime, but offensive to those who see these things.

"We found that nearly half of the co-educational state-funded schools we looked are actually doing worse than average," explained Clare Thomson, curriculum and diversity manager at the Institute of Physics.

There are at least three things to notice, two of which amusingly clash with what the article is promoting.

That really is an appalling use of statistics. Ignoring the metric itself for a moment, and assuming that the selection of schools is either random or all-encompassing, the the fact that 49% of schools perform at a level below the average is neither surprising nor noteworthy, but simply a feature of statistical spread, however wide or narrow. They then go on to say that everyone doing worse than the average is doing something wrong - which may or may not be the case; there is no reason why the borderline between right vs wrong behaviour should be at the average point. Later on, they mention that "some schools are bucking the trend"; well yes, someone will be at the top of any measurement. I probably haven't covered all your concerns, but there is lots to dislike in this article which while it may have a valid underlying point, contains so many layers of dumbing-down and misuse of statistics, and has almost no information within it which would support the fundamental claim.

[jdaw1]

"We found that nearly half of the co-educational state-funded schools we looked are actually doing worse than average,"

PhilW has nicely explained this failure to understand how distributions work.

explained Clare Thomson

So in an article about women not doing enough maths, in which the complainant doesn’t understand basic maths, is the complainant male or female? They want to show that, to paraphrase, women can do maths, but have produced a woman failing to do simple maths. Oh dear.

curriculum and diversity manager at the Institute of Physics.

They want to show that, to paraphrase, women can do maths. They could have chosen to quote a female particle physicist, a female cosmologist, or perhaps one of the female members or former members of the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee. A woman who can do, and does, something numerate. There are many. No, that would have required thinking. Instead the complaint about ‟reinforcing gender stereotypes” is coming from a female ‟diversity manager”. Oh dear.

[djewesbury]

Has an email been sent already?

[jdaw1]

Has an email been sent already?

Not by me. The modern dogma does not allow critical comment on such matters, irrespective or the wisdom or folly of the criticism.

[djewesbury]

Has an email been sent already?

Not by me. The modern dogma does not allow critical comment on such matters, irrespective or the wisdom or folly of the criticism.

Oh dear I'd better stop correcting these essays then.

[jdaw1]

Oh dear I'd better stop correcting these essays then.

Academia should be about making plausible and interesting hypotheses, and testing them against the data. Except that, for Larry Summers, the hypothesis was contrary to the mandatory dogma, and he lost his job.

There is only one correct course.

If you deny the dogma, you lose your job. Therefore, if you look at the data and claim to believe the dogma, some people will think that the belief is driven by a desire not to lose the job. If you look at the data, there are two outcomes: lose job; or be thought a patsy. Hence it is important never to look at the data. Look away. Don’t read the books. Don’t read the papers. Look away. Then, if asked, one can say ‟I haven’t looked at the data.” That is the only job-preserving non-patsy thing course.

[djewesbury]

I want to know more about the job-preserving non-patsy thing course!

[PhilW]

I was to know more about the job-preserving non-patsy thing course!

I'm sure we could run one of those for £1000/head

[djewesbury]

I was to know more about the job-preserving non-patsy thing course!

I'm sure we could run one of those for £1000/head

Excellent. I'll get a PowerPoint together with some meaningless statistics.

[PhilW]

The problem is that Julian hasn't actually given me a good reason for why it's incorrect.

Compare and contrast:
• Fine ales from Isle of Skye
• Fine ales from ‘Isle of Skye’
What is the purpose of the quotation marks in the latter? I could have understood ‟Fine Isle-of-Skye ales”, as a compound adjective, but with the current arrangement of the words, the compounding is wrong.

I thought you were complaining about "Macnabs Inn" (vs "Macnab's Inn")... I assumed that from the "Isle of Skye" being in quotes meant that is was only partially, or not-really, from the Isle of Skye, e.g. because the pub was just off it.

[djewesbury]

The problem is that Julian hasn't actually given me a good reason for why it's incorrect.

Compare and contrast:
• Fine ales from Isle of Skye
• Fine ales from ‘Isle of Skye’
What is the purpose of the quotation marks in the latter? I could have understood ‟Fine Isle-of-Skye ales”, as a compound adjective, but with the current arrangement of the words, the compounding is wrong.

I thought you were complaining about "Macnabs Inn" (vs "Macnab's Inn")... I assumed that from the "Isle of Skye" being in quotes meant that is was only partially, or not-really, from the Isle of Skye, e.g. because the pub was just off it.

Me too.

[Glenn E.]

The problem is that Julian hasn't actually given me a good reason for why it's incorrect.

Compare and contrast:
• Fine ales from Isle of Skye
• Fine ales from ‘Isle of Skye’
What is the purpose of the quotation marks in the latter? I could have understood ‟Fine Isle-of-Skye ales”, as a compound adjective, but with the current arrangement of the words, the compounding is wrong.

Silly me, I thought the problem was "Macnabs Inn." This being the Apostrophe Crimes thread and all.

[jdaw1]

Silly me, I thought the problem was "Macnabs Inn." This being the Apostrophe Crimes thread and all.

I accept that the problem was an Apostrophes crime, rather than the singular Apostrophe crime.

[djewesbury]

Silly me, I thought the problem was "Macnabs Inn." This being the Apostrophe Crimes thread and all.

I accept that the problem was an Apostrophes crime, rather than the singular Apostrophe crime.

They're not apostrophes, they're quotation marks.

[jdaw1]

They're not apostrophes, they're quotation marks.

Oops. {Sackcloth and Ashes which we’re losing.}

[djewesbury]

They're not apostrophes, they're quotation marks.

Oops. {Sackcloth and Ashes which we’re losing.}

My sackcloth and ashes (donned yesterday) are beginning to become unhygienic. May I get dressed now?

[djewesbury]

[DRT]

I think registered trademarks are exempt from prosecution.

[jdaw1]

I also prefer ‟1960s” to ‟1960’s”, but the latter form has been sanctified by ancient use.

[djewesbury]

I also prefer ‟1960s” to ‟1960’s”, but the latter form has been sanctified by ancient use.

How? It's a plural. Simples no?
(It was the date I was commenting upon, not the brand name.)

[jdaw1]

I also prefer ‟1960s” to ‟1960’s”, but the latter form has been sanctified by ancient use.

George Saintsbury:

[djewesbury]

Ugh

[jdaw1]

Ugh

I also prefer ‟1960s” to ‟1960’s”, but the latter form has been sanctified by ancient use.

We agree.

[PhilW]

This post doesn't exist. If it did, I wouldn't have written it. If I wrote it, I wasn't there. Honest.

[djewesbury]

I also prefer ‟1960s” to ‟1960’s”, but the latter form has been sanctified by ancient use.

George Saintsbury:

I think context has a part to play here. I would definitely expect no apostrophe to be used for "we made no port in the 1960s or 1970s", but would expect it in "there was little VA found in the 1960's ports" (meaning ports 'belonging' to the decade of the 1960s [not just 1960 itself]) which could, in the context of discussion of ports, be shortened to "there was little VA found in the 1960's" if intending to the ports of the 1960s, thereby referring to the wine rather than the decade (as per use in the quoted section). Borderline, but probably acceptable.

I think that sounds like a perfectly horrible justification. And I disagree too.
If the possessive were applied to a plural the apostrophe would go after the terminal s.

[PhilW]

I think that sounds like a perfectly horrible justification. And I disagree too.
If the possessive were applied to a plural the apostrophe would go after the terminal s.

Agreed, my last post was rubbish.

[jdaw1]

Another example, from Wine And Food Quarterly, Spring 1964:

[djewesbury]

Will's were not revised, but one is likely to be in due course.

[Alex Bridgeman]

Will's were not revised, but one is likely to be in due course.

Quite right too. Shocking use of an apostrophe.

Unless it's a contraction of "Will and Testament" of course. Like 'cello, piano' or 'flu'. But it wouldn't have been now...would it?

[jdaw1]

Not a complaint or an error, merely an observation which might be of interest.

Examiners should not object to the specification and/or claims in patent applications merely because applicants are using British English spellings (e.g., colour) rather than American English spellings. It is not necessary to replace the British English spellings with the equivalent American English spellings in the U.S. patent applications. Note that 37 CFR 1.52(b)(1)(ii) only requires the application to be in the English language. There is no additional requirement that the English must be American English.

Be in the English language or be accompanied by a translation of the application and a translation of any corrections or amendments into the English language together with a statement that the translation is accurate.

[jdaw1]

• Polymer banknotes are more durable. They last at least 2.5 times longer than paper banknotes so will take much longer to become ‟tatty”, improving the quality of banknotes in circulation.

It is possible that ‟tatty” is correctly quoted, if the Old Lady is quoting some authority on what happens to non-polymer notes. But unlikely.

[jdaw1]

Is a word missing?

(Candidate words including ‟dis-empowered infantalised citizens of a bureaucratic nanny state”.)

[djewesbury]

Is a word missing?

(Candidate words including ‟dis-empowered infantalised citizens of a bureaucratic nanny state”.)

And I thought this thread was about grammar!
Quis custodiet custodiens*?

[Glenn E.]

There is a grammar problem. 'Interests' and 'passenger safety' do not agree.

[djewesbury]

There is a grammar problem. 'Interests' and 'passenger safety' do not agree.

But, to quote your own logic, so often seen / heard that surely part of common usage by now?
Safe driving from the Great Wen.

[Glenn E.]

There is a grammar problem. 'Interests' and 'passenger safety' do not agree.

But, to quote your own logic, so often seen / heard that surely part of common usage by now?

Only if you also believe that 'irregardless' is a word.

Besides, not my logic. At least not that I recall.

[djewesbury]

There is a grammar problem. 'Interests' and 'passenger safety' do not agree.

But, to quote your own logic, so often seen / heard that surely part of common usage by now?

Only if you also believe that 'irregardless' is a word.

Besides, not my logic. At least not that I recall.

Forgive me. I mistook you for JDAW. The clue is in the name, I know, but I managed to overlook that. This misrecognition also explains my wish that you drive safely from London (the Great Wen).
I have my new glasses on now.

[DRT]

I'm please to see that at least one person is still alive following last night's exploits at The Bell

[djewesbury]

I'm please to see that at least one person is still alive following last night's exploits at The Bell

Very much alive. I was home in Belfast by 10 o'clock this morning. Slightly tired now.

[jdaw1]

fuzzy views of DSO's (Deep Space Objects).

[DRT]

fuzzy views of DSO's (Deep Space Objects).

Can I not argue that "O's" is a contraction of "Objects"?