ThePortForum.com

jdaw1 wrote:

SCP-DFF wrote: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.

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

jdaw1 wrote:

Glenn E. wrote: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 wrote:They're not apostrophes, they're quotation marks.

jdaw1 wrote:

djewesbury wrote:They're not apostrophes, they're quotation marks.

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

jdaw1 wrote:I also prefer ‟1960s” to ‟1960’s”, but the latter form has been sanctified by ancient use.

jdaw1 wrote:I also prefer ‟1960s” to ‟1960’s”, but the latter form has been sanctified by ancient use.

djewesbury wrote:Ugh

jdaw1 wrote:I also prefer ‟1960s” to ‟1960’s”, but the latter form has been sanctified by ancient use.

PhilW wrote:

jdaw1 wrote:

jdaw1 wrote: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.

djewesbury wrote: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.

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

djewesbury wrote:

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

The US Patent and Trademark Office, in [url=http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s608.html]s608[/url], wrote: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.

The US Patent and Trademark Office, in [url=http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/mpep-9020-appx-r.html#d0e318327]1.52(b)(1)(ii)[/url], wrote: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.

The Bank of England, in a news release entitled [url=http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Pages/news/2013/189.aspx]New Bank of England banknotes to be printed on polymer[/url], wrote:

• 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.

jdaw1 wrote:Is a word missing?

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

Glenn E. wrote:There is a grammar problem. 'Interests' and 'passenger safety' do not agree.

djewesbury wrote:

Glenn E. wrote: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?

Glenn E. wrote:

djewesbury wrote:

Glenn E. wrote: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.

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

[url=http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=69068#p69068]Here[/url] DRT wrote:fuzzy views of DSO's (Deep Space Objects).

jdaw1 wrote:

[url=http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=69068#p69068]Here[/url] DRT wrote:fuzzy views of DSO's (Deep Space Objects).

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

AHB wrote: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?

[url=http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=7726&p=69109#p69104]Here[/url], DRT wrote:I've just been out to look at Jupiter and I would be prepared to swear under oath that I seen the Great Red Spot. It was either that or a random reflection from my neighbours security light.

[url=http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=7822]Here[/url] PhilW wrote:Darwin was writing his Origin of the species

DRT wrote:Perhaps harsh, but the subject is plural rather than singular so I think there is a case to be answered!

[url=http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=7822]Here[/url] PhilW wrote:Darwin was writing his Origin of the species

DRT wrote:Perhaps harsh, but the subject is plural rather than singular so I think there is a case to be answered!

[url=http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=7822]Here[/url] PhilW wrote:Darwin was writing his Origin of the species

PhilW wrote:Not sure on the proposed singular/plural crime

jdaw1 wrote:I have misunderstood, and further explanation is about to appear.

DRT wrote:The crime that was committed was that a self-confessed, well educated pedant incorrectly naming one of the most famous books in the history of the English language. That was the crime.

jdaw1 wrote:Perhaps, as I started this, I should be blamed.

PhilW wrote:

DRT wrote:Perhaps harsh, but the subject is plural rather than singular so I think there is a case to be answered!

[url=http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=7822]Here[/url] PhilW wrote:Darwin was writing his Origin of the species

Not sure on the proposed singular/plural crime, though I did misquote the title which should have been (On the) Origin of Species.

Alok Jha, in [url=http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/27/antarctic-mission-icebreaker-delay-rescue]an article in The Guardian about a ship stuck in the Antarctic ice[/url], wrote:The expedition leader had reassured us earlier that this kind of venture always allowed for this kind of contingency. It would, he said, be a couple of weeks before we were reduced to dehydrated food.

Quoting Chris Fogwill in the same article, Jha also wrote:At the edge of the continent you have strong weather systems and the speed at which things can happen is astronomical.

DRT wrote:Is the dot under the hyper-script "s" a substitute for an apostrophe?