Re: Is RCN Outsourced to India or Something??

[NYC XYZ]

I think it's atrocious what the nyt is doing, AND I HATE "APOSTROPHE-S"
FOR "JONES'" -- AS IN, "JONES'S" [SIC, SIC, SIC!]!!!


bryanska wrote:
> > "Use of plurals is another area of confusion to authors and editors.
> > As with everything, Chicago/Turabian style takes precedence in this
> > project. One area of specific confusion when it comes to computer
> > terms is with acronyms. Most people mistakenly add an apostrophe and
> > letter 's' to make an acronym plural. The major proponent of this
> > incorrect method is 'The New York Times,' even though all publishing
> > houses and computer magazines agree that it is wrong."
> >
> > Rephrasing this in non-perjorative terms:
> > The New York Times would say NG's.
> > Most people would say NG's
> > Many/Most/All other publishers would say NGs.
> > To me, this says either can be justified.
>
> The quote directly says all publishing houses believe the practice to
> be wrong. And the author admits and believes the practice to be
> incorrect, too. And "most people" make the mistake.
>
> I gotta stand my ground here. Incorrect usage.

 

[Claire Petersky]

"NYC XYZ" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I think it's atrocious what the nyt is doing, AND I HATE "APOSTROPHE-S"
> FOR "JONES'" -- AS IN, "JONES'S" [SIC, SIC, SIC!]!!!


What! That's perfectly acceptable: "That's the Jones's house" The exception,
I believe, is Jesus', which has some sort of historical root.

What drives me nuts is "it's" for "its".

--
Warm Regards,

Claire Petersky
http://www.bicyclemeditations.org/
Sponsor me for the Big Climb! See: www.active.com/donate/cpetersky06
See the books I've set free at:
http://bookcrossing.com/referral/Cpetersky

 

[Peter Clinch]

Claire Petersky wrote:

> What! That's perfectly acceptable: "That's the Jones's house"

It's been a while, but if it really sank in I was taught that for a
single trailing 's' you'd just leave it as an apostrophe on its own, so
while my bike is Pete's bike, my other half's is Roos' bike.

> The exception,
> I believe, is Jesus', which has some sort of historical root.

No, and Jesus is still quite a common name in many places, he's not a
singular figure with a special exception.

> What drives me nuts is "it's" for "its".

It's something annoying, but it's not quite as common, or annoying, as
plurals becoming "plural's"... Though of course in some languages that
is the /correct/ usage.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

 

[NYC XYZ]

Claire Petersky wrote:
>
>
>
> What! That's perfectly acceptable: "That's the Jones's house" The exception,
> I believe, is Jesus', which has some sort of historical root.

Now it's acceptable -- even de rigeur -- but it looks redundant,
almost. The old way of doing it was simply with the apostrophe. How
do you pronounce "s's" anyway?

> What drives me nuts is "it's" for "its".

That, too. RCN is very bad in this regard. Like I said, I'm afraid of
subliminally picking up bad habits reading it! But it's annoying to
have to be on-guard leisure-reading.

> --
> Warm Regards,
>
> Claire Petersky
> http://www.bicyclemeditations.org/
> Sponsor me for the Big Climb! See: www.active.com/donate/cpetersky06
> See the books I've set free at:
> http://bookcrossing.com/referral/Cpetersky

 

[Paul Turner]

NYC XYZ wrote:

> Claire Petersky wrote:
>>
>> What! That's perfectly acceptable: "That's the Jones's house" The
>> exception,
>> I believe, is Jesus', which has some sort of historical root.
>
> Now it's acceptable -- even de rigeur -- but it looks redundant,
> almost. The old way of doing it was simply with the apostrophe. How
> do you pronounce "s's" anyway?
>
It has been de rigeur for a long time. Strunk & White and Fowler both go
with Jones's. It's pronounced the way we actually pronounce it when we
aren't thinking about it. If I say, "I stole Jones's bike," I say Jones's in
two syllables, not one.

--
Paul Turner

 

[[email protected]]

A shy person writes:

>> What! That's perfectly acceptable: "That's the Jones's house" The
>> exception, I believe, is Jesus', which has some sort of historical
>> root.

> Now it's acceptable -- even de rigeur -- but it looks redundant,
> almost. The old way of doing it was simply with the apostrophe.
> How do you pronounce "s's" anyway?

You must mean "de rigueur."

>> What drives me nuts is "it's" for "its".

> That, too. RCN is very bad in this regard. Like I said, I'm afraid
> of subliminally picking up bad habits reading it! But it's annoying
> to have to be on-guard leisure-reading.

While you're quibbling about grammar, the correct usage is "As I said",
and that's valid in all NG's.

Jobst Brandt

 

[Edward Dolan]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>A shy person writes:
[...]
>> That, too. RCN is very bad in this regard. Like I said, I'm afraid
>> of subliminally picking up bad habits reading it! But it's annoying
>> to have to be on-guard leisure-reading.
>
> While you're quibbling about grammar, the correct usage is "As I said",
> and that's valid in all NG's.
>
> Jobst Brandt

No, it is perfectly acceptable to say "like" instead of "as". It is a
colloquial American usage and is done all the time.

What is not valid is for you to be substituting "A shy person writes:" for
the name of the original poster. Were you born in a barn?

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

 

[Veloise]

NYC XYZ wrote:
> Now it's acceptable -- even de rigeur -- but it looks redundant,
> almost. The old way of doing it was simply with the apostrophe. How
> do you pronounce "s's" anyway?


Like the tuba player in the Canadian Brass going on and on and on about
"Bach's..." and by about the second time he says it, the audience joins
in.

The newsgroup's what? Curmudgeon? Does it also eat, shoot, and leave?

HTH

--Karen D.
who whips out a marker to add an editorial "delete" curlique to any
sign that reads APPLE'S

 

[NYC XYZ]

[email protected] wrote:
>
>
> You must mean "de rigueur."

Oui, c'est ça!

> While you're quibbling about grammar, the correct usage is "As I said",
> and that's valid in all NG's.

Being that this is just usenet and NGs, colloquial speech is not
incorrect.

> Jobst Brandt

 

[[email protected]]

anonymous "foreigner" writes:

>> You must mean "de rigueur."

> Oui, c'est ça!

>> While you're quibbling about grammar, the correct usage is "As I
>> said", and that's valid in all NG's.

> Being that this is just usenet and NGs, colloquial speech is not
> incorrect.

That depends on how low you want to go with dumbing down written
communication. This is a typical excuse of the illiterate.

Jobst Brandt

 

[Veloise]

jobst.brandt wrote:

> That depends on how low you want to go with dumbing down written
> communication. This is a typical excuse of the illiterate.

Hear, hear!

"It's ok to use that spelling/punctuation/bad grammar/improper word use
'cuz I read it on the internet."

--Karen D.

 

[NYC XYZ]

[email protected] wrote:
>
>
> That depends on how low you want to go with dumbing down written
> communication. This is a typical excuse of the illiterate.
>
> Jobst Brandt


********. Or were your ancestors illiterate German peasants who didn't
know how to spell "Brand"?

 

[NYC XYZ]

[email protected] wrote:
>
>
> That depends on how low you want to go with dumbing down written
> communication. This is a typical excuse of the illiterate.
>
> Jobst Brandt


********. Or were your ancestors illiterate German peasants who didn't
know how to spell "Brand"?

 

[Edward Dolan]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
anonymous "foreigner" writes:

>> You must mean "de rigueur."

> Oui, c'est ça!

>> While you're quibbling about grammar, the correct usage is "As I
>> said", and that's valid in all NG's.

> Being that this is just usenet and NGs, colloquial speech is not
> incorrect.

That depends on how low you want to go with dumbing down written
communication. This is a typical excuse of the illiterate.

Jobst Brandt

NYC is anything but illiterate, but he can be a bit sloppy from time to
time. So can you by the way. There is common colloquial speech and then
there is that which is not common. We should not ever be using that which is
not common, but it is absurd to confuse Usenet with anything we would ever
write for publication. Even I, the Great Ed Dolan, have been known to be not
always 100% correct, so that let's everyone else off the hook, even Jobst (I
wonder how the hell you pronounce a name like that).

Regards,

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
aka
Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota