|
Post by TfS on May 19, 2008 19:05:52 GMT
Paul, Looking at the Apostrophe Rules on "our" page, eng-lang.co.uk/apostrophe_rules.htm I was a bit confused when I read (again) the rule about To indicate missing letters in the middle of words.and these two examples: I'd like an ice-cream, please. We'd better hurry.Here there are two words involved in each case which have been contracted into one word but the missing letters are in fact at the beginning of the second word and not in the middle. Is this nit-picking or should these two examples perhaps have another heading? TfS
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on May 19, 2008 19:53:04 GMT
I wondered that, TfS. What do you think now?
|
|
|
Post by Tone on May 19, 2008 21:00:05 GMT
>I think 'other' is a very good description for you, Tone.<I see that cruelty is transboardal! Tone
|
|
|
Post by TfS on May 20, 2008 7:30:10 GMT
I wondered that, TfS. What do you think now? I must confess to not having given this much thought but I suppose something like To indicate missing letters in contracted wordsHe is = He's I am = I'm Do not = Don't They have = They've It is = It's I would = I'd Let us = Let's She has = She's Who is = who'sTfS
|
|
|
Post by Pete on May 20, 2008 7:51:44 GMT
How do we account for "shan't"? It seems to be an exception to all the rules, as it's a double contraction.
|
|
|
Post by TfS on May 20, 2008 8:00:19 GMT
How do we account for "shan't"? It seems to be an exception to all the rules, as it's a double contraction. Odd that "win't" (will not) doesn't exist. TfS
|
|
|
Post by Sue M-V on May 20, 2008 15:50:37 GMT
How do we account for "shan't"? It seems to be an exception to all the rules, as it's a double contraction. As I must have said before, it used to be written "sha'n't" till it started to make pages look as though they had the measles, and so the first apostrophe was rationalised away. I wonder whether it's the "won't" that's odd, or whether it's actually the "will" that is! I think that the early forms of the word had os, rather than is in them! Sue
|
|
|
Post by Alan Palmer on May 20, 2008 15:57:38 GMT
Wasn't it originally "wol not" or "woll not"?
|
|
|
Post by Dave on May 21, 2008 5:17:43 GMT
Wasn't it originally "wol not" or "woll not"? Wol not [ME] according to Webster's.
|
|
|
Post by amanda on May 21, 2008 7:06:24 GMT
In these parts, 'doesn't' is often pronounced dun't. It sounds dreadful and mercifully I have yet to see it written, but yet... it's actually not that far removed from shan't and won't.
|
|
|
Post by Alan Palmer on Jun 7, 2008 10:54:00 GMT
I wouldn't normally post this sort of message, but ... There is an on-line petition that I would urge all British readers to consider signing. It has been signed by many British teachers, authors and librarians. There is a proposal by the publishing industry to age-band all children's books by printing a very large number onto the cover saying what age it is intended for. It is felt to be ill-advised for all sorts of reasons, many listed on the site. The full text of the petition can be found at No to Age Banding.
|
|
|
Post by Verbivore on Jun 7, 2008 11:13:56 GMT
Alan: What a ridiculous and insulting idea, this age-banding nonsense! I "signed" the petition.
On the web site, however, toward the bottom of one page, was the statement (my bold): Now perhaps I'm just in old fogey (i.e. usual) mood, but I would rewrite that thus:
[...] However, there is an inevitable delay between your sending your email and its being uploaded.
|
|
|
Post by Sue M-V on Jun 7, 2008 12:14:52 GMT
That makes two old fogeys!
Sue
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Jun 7, 2008 16:05:24 GMT
Alan: What a ridiculous and insulting idea, this age-banding nonsense! I "signed" the petition. On the web site, however, toward the bottom of one page, was the statement (my bold): Now perhaps I'm just in old fogey (i.e. usual) mood, but I would rewrite that thus: [...] However, there is an inevitable delay between your sending your email and its being uploaded. Vv, can you explain to us yong(er) fogeys why it necessarily requires the possessive pronouns? I would be happy with either version.
|
|
|
Post by Tone on Jun 7, 2008 20:58:42 GMT
Vv, >What a ridiculous and insulting idea, this age-banding nonsense! I "signed" the petition.<
So will I, when I decide what to call myself! (I notice they are nearly all librarians.)
(I think that Charles will also sign it when I tell her about it.)
Any suggestions from others? (Mayhap an appropriate reference to that which we do here -- or even to here!)
Tone
|
|