Moron Watch wrote:
URL's is spelt URL's because its an acronym (loosely
speaking) of the phrase "Universal Resource Locators".

Um no. Acronyms are abbreviations that are pronounced as a single word
rather than as a string of letters. URL is never pronounced "earl" so that
makes it an abbreviation.

The role
of the apostrophe in this case is to replace "ocators" which
if fully spelled out, would follow the final "L".

Have neither yourself nor Tim Streater never wondered why the plural
of "OBE" is spelled "OBE's" ? Silly question, obviously not.

I can't speak of you, but "wonder" and "thinking" clearly don't
figure very highly, in what goes on between Mr Streater's ears.

Fashions in the use of apostrophes have changed. As long as they help to
clarify rather than confuse, precisely how they are used in any particular
situation relating to plurals seems to me to be of lesser importance.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 20/12/16 12:55, Tim+ wrote:
Moron Watch wrote:
URL's is spelt URL's because its an acronym (loosely
speaking) of the phrase "Universal Resource Locators".

Um no. Acronyms are abbreviations that are pronounced as a single word
rather than as a string of letters. URL is never pronounced "earl" so that
makes it an abbreviation.


TLA

Tim+ wrote:

URL is never pronounced "earl" so that makes it an abbreviation.

Never? I've heard a minority that do ...

In article ,
Tim+ wrote:
Fashions in the use of apostrophes have changed. As long as they help to
clarify rather than confuse, precisely how they are used in any
particular situation relating to plurals seems to me to be of lesser
importance.

Absolute ballock's. ;-)

--
*When you get a bladder infection urine trouble.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 20/12/16 09:13, Moron Watch wrote:
"TimW" wrote in message news
On 19/12/16 21:58, Moron Watch wrote:
[...]

Acronyms such as URL are pronounced using their component letters
as individual sounds thus YOU ARE ELL. Not as EARL.

While the plural of URL pronounced Earl would indeed be URLs
the plural of URL pronounced YOU ARE ELL is URL's.

The exact same applies to things such as MBE's, CBE's, and OBE's

HTH

That's a grammar rule I have never heard of! It doesn't sound right to me either.

Your lack of knowledge on this or any other topic, is fortunately
none of my concern. Neither it seems, is it any of any great
concern to you either.

Did you make it up or do you have a ref to a better authority than yourself?

So that however old you are, no matter how many years you've already
been gracing the planet with your presence, you're still not aware
of the function of the apostrophe in replacing missing letters ?

Did they not teach you that in Primary School ?

Just try Googling "apostrophe" and "missing letters" and a whole
new world is about to open up to both yourself and Tim Streater.
Who it appears didn't even realise URL is actually pronounced
You Are Ell. URL's is spelt URL's because its an acronym (loosely
speaking) of the phrase "Universal Resource Locators". The role
of the apostrophe in this case is to replace "ocators" which
if fully spelled out, would follow the final "L".

Have neither yourself nor Tim Streater never wondered why the plural
of "OBE" is spelled "OBE's" ? Silly question, obviously not.

I can't speak of you, but "wonder" and "thinking" clearly don't
figure very highly, in what goes on between Mr Streater's ears.


This bloke is a larf!
Clueless, rude and pompous.
TW

On 20/12/16 12:55, Tim+ wrote:


Fashions in the use of apostrophes have changed. As long as they help to
clarify rather than confuse, precisely how they are used in any particular
situation relating to plurals seems to me to be of lesser importance.

Tim

Totally wisdom from this Tim+. A nugget of truth in the dirty dull swamp
of ukdiy.
Tim W

In article ,
TimW wrote:
On 20/12/16 12:55, Tim+ wrote:


Fashions in the use of apostrophes have changed. As long as they help
to clarify rather than confuse, precisely how they are used in any
particular situation relating to plurals seems to me to be of lesser
importance.

Tim

Totally wisdom from this Tim+. A nugget of truth in the dirty dull swamp
of ukdiy.
Tim W

I'd love either of you to explain this. How does adding an apostrophe
where not appropriate help clarity? And example would suffice.

--
*I took an IQ test and the results were negative.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 14:24:27 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
TimW wrote:
On 20/12/16 12:55, Tim+ wrote:


Fashions in the use of apostrophes have changed. As long as they help
to clarify rather than confuse, precisely how they are used in any
particular situation relating to plurals seems to me to be of lesser
importance.

Tim

Totally wisdom from this Tim+. A nugget of truth in the dirty dull
swamp of ukdiy.
Tim W

I'd love either of you to explain this. How does adding an apostrophe
where not appropriate help clarity? And example would suffice.

How many i's are there in "initial"?

How many is are there in "initial"?




--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On 20/12/16 16:49, Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 14:24:27 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
TimW wrote:
On 20/12/16 12:55, Tim+ wrote:


Fashions in the use of apostrophes have changed. As long as they help
to clarify rather than confuse, precisely how they are used in any
particular situation relating to plurals seems to me to be of lesser
importance.

Tim

Totally wisdom from this Tim+. A nugget of truth in the dirty dull
swamp of ukdiy.
Tim W

I'd love either of you to explain this. How does adding an apostrophe
where not appropriate help clarity? And example would suffice.

How many i's are there in "initial"?

How many is are there in "initial"?



Both wrong.

How many 'i's are there in 'initial'.

On 20/12/16 14:49, Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 14:24:27 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
TimW wrote:
On 20/12/16 12:55, Tim+ wrote:


Fashions in the use of apostrophes have changed. As long as they help
to clarify rather than confuse, precisely how they are used in any
particular situation relating to plurals seems to me to be of lesser
importance.

Tim

Totally wisdom from this Tim+. A nugget of truth in the dirty dull
swamp of ukdiy.
Tim W

I'd love either of you to explain this. How does adding an apostrophe
where not appropriate help clarity? And example would suffice.

How many i's are there in "initial"?

How many is are there in "initial"?


People often refer to css (as well as CSS) re html You can have a css
file or a css, or several css's where it would be confusing to have
several csss, although not much of a problem with CSSs. The apostrophe I
think would clarify the pronunciation, although I wouldn't use it myself
- it just seems wrong.

Tim w

Huge wrote:

Also "www" as "dub-dub-dub".

dub-dub-dub tends to be said by the same crowd as earl, IME

In article ,
Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 14:24:27 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
TimW wrote:
On 20/12/16 12:55, Tim+ wrote:


Fashions in the use of apostrophes have changed. As long as they help
to clarify rather than confuse, precisely how they are used in any
particular situation relating to plurals seems to me to be of lesser
importance.

Tim

Totally wisdom from this Tim+. A nugget of truth in the dirty dull
swamp of ukdiy.
Tim W

I'd love either of you to explain this. How does adding an apostrophe
where not appropriate help clarity? An example would suffice.

How many i's are there in "initial"?

That is an appropriate use.

How many is are there in "initial"?

Without the apostrophe that sentence makes no sense. There is no such noun
as 'is'.

You'll have to try harder. ;-)

--
*Why is it that most nudists are people you don't want to see naked?*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Tim Watts wrote:
On 20/12/16 12:55, Tim+ wrote:
Moron Watch wrote:
URL's is spelt URL's because its an acronym (loosely
speaking) of the phrase "Universal Resource Locators".

Um no. Acronyms are abbreviations that are pronounced as a single word
rather than as a string of letters. URL is never pronounced "earl" so that
makes it an abbreviation.


TLA

Is an abbreviation clearly. Your point being?

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On 2016-12-19, TimW wrote:

On 19/12/16 14:27, GB wrote:
On 19/12/2016 13:54, Huge wrote:
On 2016-12-19, Muddymike wrote:
How many uk.d-i-y members does it take to change a lightbulb?


[37 lines snipped]


Happy Christmas!

*Applause*

But the thread will really get going if somebody mentions the EU or
migration.

Oh no! That's done it.



How many brexiters does it take to change a light bulb?

WE NEVER SAID THERE WAS A LIGHTBULB!

No idea who put that picture of a lightbulb on our bus!

On 2016-12-19, Muddymike wrote:

How many uk.d-i-y members does it take to change a lightbulb?
....
Happy Christmas!

Excellent! You too.

In article , Graham.
writes:

On Mon, 19 Dec 2016 21:58:29 -0000, "Moron Watch"
wrote:


"Tim Streater" wrote in message
. ..
In article ,
Muddymike wrote:

27 to post URL's where one can see examples of different light bulbs.
14 to post that the URL's were posted incorrectly and then post the corrected URL's.
3 to post about links they found from the URL's that are relevant to this group which
makes light bulbs relevant to this group.

And at least one to post that the plural of URL is URLs and not URL's.

And another to post, that that's total rubbish.

Acronyms such as URL are pronounced using their component letters
as individual sounds thus YOU ARE ELL. Not as EARL.

While the plural of URL pronounced Earl would indeed be URLs
the plural of URL pronounced YOU ARE ELL is URL's.

The exact same applies to things such as MBE's, CBE's, and OBE's

HTH


Crossposted to APIHNA for a definitive answer.

I would have said tht the post saying it was total rubbish was total
rubbish, but it seems that both forms are correct. However, saying
that it differs depending on pronunciation is total rubbish.

http://english.stackexchange.com/que...strophe-or-not

My own view is that I wouldn't use an apostrophe and it looks wrong
when someone does.

--
Mike Fleming

On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 15:24:01 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Irrelevant. There wont *be* any lightbulbs for sale if we leave the EU!

I don't see why not, and anyway I think my mum's still got a box of gas mantles "just in case".

Owain

On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 17:46:17 +0000, Mike Fleming
wrote:

In article , Graham.
writes:

On Mon, 19 Dec 2016 21:58:29 -0000, "Moron Watch"
wrote:


"Tim Streater" wrote in message
. ..
In article ,
Muddymike wrote:

27 to post URL's where one can see examples of different light bulbs.
14 to post that the URL's were posted incorrectly and then post the corrected URL's.
3 to post about links they found from the URL's that are relevant to this group which
makes light bulbs relevant to this group.

And at least one to post that the plural of URL is URLs and not URL's.

And another to post, that that's total rubbish.

Acronyms such as URL are pronounced using their component letters
as individual sounds thus YOU ARE ELL. Not as EARL.

While the plural of URL pronounced Earl would indeed be URLs
the plural of URL pronounced YOU ARE ELL is URL's.

The exact same applies to things such as MBE's, CBE's, and OBE's

HTH


Crossposted to APIHNA for a definitive answer.

I would have said tht the post saying it was total rubbish was total
rubbish, but it seems that both forms are correct. However, saying
that it differs depending on pronunciation is total rubbish.

http://english.stackexchange.com/que...strophe-or-not

My own view is that I wouldn't use an apostrophe and it looks wrong
when someone does.

Some years ago someone in alt.usage.english said that the use of an
apostrophe to form the plural of a set of initials was mandatory in the
"house style" of IBM, the computer company.

The purpose was apparently to make absolutely clear that the "s" was not
part of the string of letters.


--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.possessive.its.has.no.apostrophe)

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 14:24:27 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
TimW wrote:
On 20/12/16 12:55, Tim+ wrote:


Fashions in the use of apostrophes have changed. As long as they
help
to clarify rather than confuse, precisely how they are used in any
particular situation relating to plurals seems to me to be of lesser
importance.

Tim

Totally wisdom from this Tim+. A nugget of truth in the dirty dull
swamp of ukdiy.
Tim W

I'd love either of you to explain this. How does adding an apostrophe
where not appropriate help clarity? An example would suffice.

How many i's are there in "initial"?

That is an appropriate use.

How many is are there in "initial"?

Without the apostrophe that sentence makes no sense. There is no such noun
as 'is'.

You'll have to try harder. ;-)

That is in fact a perfect example where the use of the
apostrophe helps clarify what the question is asking.

In article , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 19/12/16 16:34, TimW wrote:
On 19/12/16 14:27, GB wrote:
On 19/12/2016 13:54, Huge wrote:
On 2016-12-19, Muddymike wrote:
How many uk.d-i-y members does it take to change a lightbulb?


[37 lines snipped]


Happy Christmas!

*Applause*

But the thread will really get going if somebody mentions the EU or
migration.

Oh no! That's done it.



How many brexiters does it take to change a light bulb?

WE NEVER SAID THERE WAS A LIGHTBULB!

How many remoaners does it take to change a lightbulb?

Irrelevant. There wont *be* any lightbulbs for sale if we leave the EU!

There won't be any power to light the lamp if we stay in.
--
bert

In article ,
Muddymike writes
On 19/12/2016 18:50, ARW wrote:
On 19/12/2016 13:53, Muddymike wrote:
How many uk.d-i-y members does it take to change a lightbulb?

1 to change the light bulb and to post that the light bulb has been
changed.
14 to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how the
light bulb could have been changed differently.
7 to caution about the dangers of changing light bulbs.
27 to point out spelling/grammar errors in posts about changing light
bulbs.
53 to flame the spell checkers.
41 to correct spelling/grammar flames.
6 to argue over whether it's "lightbulb" or "light bulb"...another 6 to
condemn those 6 as anal-retentive
2 industry professionals to inform the group that the proper term is
"lamp".

Big clip

Happy Christmas!


1 to tell you that technical term is lamp not light bulb:-)

But thanks for that

Thanks Adam but that's already covered see 3rd above.

Mike

One apprentice to drop the light bulb/lamp/lumiere and bring the whole
thread to a fitting conclusion.
--
bert

In article ,
Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 15:37:54 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 14:24:27 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
TimW wrote:
On 20/12/16 12:55, Tim+ wrote:


Fashions in the use of apostrophes have changed. As long as they
help to clarify rather than confuse, precisely how they are used
in any particular situation relating to plurals seems to me to be
of lesser importance.

Tim

Totally wisdom from this Tim+. A nugget of truth in the dirty dull
swamp of ukdiy.
Tim W

I'd love either of you to explain this. How does adding an
apostrophe where not appropriate help clarity? An example would
suffice.

How many i's are there in "initial"?

That is an appropriate use.

How many is are there in "initial"?

Without the apostrophe that sentence makes no sense. There is no such
noun as 'is'.

You asked for an example. You have proved that my example was
appropriate.

Not so. My request was for an example of where the use of an unnecessary
one clarified rather than confused.

In your example, one sentence makes no sense at all.

--
*My dog can lick anyone

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Wed, 21 Dec 2016 00:26:56 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 15:37:54 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 14:24:27 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
TimW wrote:
On 20/12/16 12:55, Tim+ wrote:


Fashions in the use of apostrophes have changed. As long as
they help to clarify rather than confuse, precisely how they
are used in any particular situation relating to plurals seems
to me to be of lesser importance.

Tim

Totally wisdom from this Tim+. A nugget of truth in the dirty
dull swamp of ukdiy.
Tim W

I'd love either of you to explain this. How does adding an
apostrophe where not appropriate help clarity? An example would
suffice.

How many i's are there in "initial"?

That is an appropriate use.

How many is are there in "initial"?

Without the apostrophe that sentence makes no sense. There is no such
noun as 'is'.

You asked for an example. You have proved that my example was
appropriate.

Not so. My request was for an example of where the use of an unnecessary
one clarified rather than confused.

In your example, one sentence makes no sense at all.

You have it back to front. The use of an unnecessary apostrophe in the
first sentence clarified what was meant. Its lack in the second sentence
served to confuse.



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

In article , on Tue, 20 Dec
2016, Peter Duncanson wrote
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 17:46:17 +0000, Mike Fleming
wrote:

In article , Graham.
writes:

On Mon, 19 Dec 2016 21:58:29 -0000, "Moron Watch"
wrote:


"Tim Streater" wrote in message
. ..
In article ,
Muddymike wrote:

27 to post URL's where one can see examples of different light bulbs.
14 to post that the URL's were posted incorrectly and then post
the corrected URL's.
3 to post about links they found from the URL's that are relevant
to this group which
makes light bulbs relevant to this group.

And at least one to post that the plural of URL is URLs and not URL's.

And another to post, that that's total rubbish.

Acronyms such as URL are pronounced using their component letters
as individual sounds thus YOU ARE ELL. Not as EARL.

While the plural of URL pronounced Earl would indeed be URLs
the plural of URL pronounced YOU ARE ELL is URL's.

The exact same applies to things such as MBE's, CBE's, and OBE's

HTH


Crossposted to APIHNA for a definitive answer.

I would have said tht the post saying it was total rubbish was total
rubbish, but it seems that both forms are correct. However, saying
that it differs depending on pronunciation is total rubbish.

Agreed.

http://english.stackexchange.com/que...of-acronyms-le
tters-numbers-use-an-apostrophe-or-not

My own view is that I wouldn't use an apostrophe and it looks wrong
when someone does.

Mine too.

Some years ago someone in alt.usage.english said that the use of an
apostrophe to form the plural of a set of initials was mandatory in the
"house style" of IBM, the computer company.

The purpose was apparently to make absolutely clear that the "s" was not
part of the string of letters.

That may be the case for IBM, or have been at some time in the past.

Conventions change. Abbreviations (whether pronounceable, like RADAR, or
have to be spelt, like URL) used to be spelt (if that's the right word!)
with dots (followed by spaces) after the letters. The spaces went,
followed by the dots - allegedly initially by the railway companies in
Britain, to save paint and labour time, though that may be urban legend,
around the 19th/20th century transition - but the dots at least remained
in typed and printed text, fading out gradually around 196x to around
199x. Now, an abbreviation _tends_ to be shown by putting them in
capitals, though with the decline of standards in general, such a
consistency has many exceptions.

I would hold that a lower-case s following an upper-case abbreviation
does not need an apostrophe, in fact that the apostrophe looks wrong: it
isn't possessive (except in the rare cases where it really is, such as
"the URL's middle section"), and it can't really be said to indicate
omission, otherwise there'd need to be one after _each_ letter in the
abbreviation. (Which not only looks weird, but is as tedious to type as
the dots were, which is why they evolved out of use in the first place.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

* SLMR 2.1a #113 * Tits like watermelons, sparrows like bacon rind.
- 03-22-97 Dave Beecham (quoted by
Gene Wirchenko, in alt.windows7.general, 2012-10-16.)

On 21/12/2016 00:38, Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 21 Dec 2016 00:26:56 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 15:37:54 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 14:24:27 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
TimW wrote:
On 20/12/16 12:55, Tim+ wrote:


Fashions in the use of apostrophes have changed. As long as
they help to clarify rather than confuse, precisely how they
are used in any particular situation relating to plurals seems
to me to be of lesser importance.

Tim

Totally wisdom from this Tim+. A nugget of truth in the dirty
dull swamp of ukdiy.
Tim W

I'd love either of you to explain this. How does adding an
apostrophe where not appropriate help clarity? An example would
suffice.

How many i's are there in "initial"?

That is an appropriate use.

How many is are there in "initial"?

Without the apostrophe that sentence makes no sense. There is no such
noun as 'is'.

You asked for an example. You have proved that my example was
appropriate.

Not so. My request was for an example of where the use of an unnecessary
one clarified rather than confused.

In your example, one sentence makes no sense at all.

You have it back to front. The use of an unnecessary apostrophe in the
first sentence clarified what was meant. Its lack in the second sentence
served to confuse.

Or put another way, the apostrophe in the first sentence is unnecessary
for normal grammar rules. "i's" is neither possessive nor an
abbreviation, so one wouldn't normally use one there. Compare to "How
many bears are there in Alaska?" - you wouldn't write "bear's".
However putting one in helps clarity. Thus adding the apostrophe where
not appropriate helps clarity.

On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 16:59:40 +0200, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 20/12/16 16:49, Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 14:24:27 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
TimW wrote:
On 20/12/16 12:55, Tim+ wrote:


Fashions in the use of apostrophes have changed. As long as they
help to clarify rather than confuse, precisely how they are used in
any particular situation relating to plurals seems to me to be of
lesser importance.

Tim

Totally wisdom from this Tim+. A nugget of truth in the dirty dull
swamp of ukdiy.
Tim W

I'd love either of you to explain this. How does adding an apostrophe
where not appropriate help clarity? And example would suffice.

How many i's are there in "initial"?

How many is are there in "initial"?



Both wrong.

How many 'i's are there in 'initial'.

I agree that that works. But it's not the only way.


--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On Wed, 21 Dec 2016 02:13:35 +0000, Clive George wrote:

On 21/12/2016 00:38, Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 21 Dec 2016 00:26:56 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 15:37:54 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 14:24:27 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
TimW wrote:
On 20/12/16 12:55, Tim+ wrote:


Fashions in the use of apostrophes have changed. As long as they
help to clarify rather than confuse, precisely how they are used
in any particular situation relating to plurals seems to me to
be of lesser importance.

Tim

Totally wisdom from this Tim+. A nugget of truth in the dirty
dull swamp of ukdiy.
Tim W

I'd love either of you to explain this. How does adding an
apostrophe where not appropriate help clarity? An example would
suffice.

How many i's are there in "initial"?

That is an appropriate use.

How many is are there in "initial"?

Without the apostrophe that sentence makes no sense. There is no
such noun as 'is'.

You asked for an example. You have proved that my example was
appropriate.

Not so. My request was for an example of where the use of an
unnecessary one clarified rather than confused.

In your example, one sentence makes no sense at all.

You have it back to front. The use of an unnecessary apostrophe in the
first sentence clarified what was meant. Its lack in the second
sentence served to confuse.

Or put another way, the apostrophe in the first sentence is unnecessary
for normal grammar rules. "i's" is neither possessive nor an
abbreviation, so one wouldn't normally use one there. Compare to "How
many bears are there in Alaska?" - you wouldn't write "bear's". However
putting one in helps clarity. Thus adding the apostrophe where not
appropriate helps clarity.

Exactly.



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On 21/12/16 04:13, Clive George wrote:
"i's" is neither possessive nor an abbreviation, so one wouldn't
normally use one there.

"I's getting mah corncobs from da chillun!"

On 21/12/16 06:39, Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 21 Dec 2016 02:13:35 +0000, Clive George wrote:

On 21/12/2016 00:38, Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 21 Dec 2016 00:26:56 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 15:37:54 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 14:24:27 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
TimW wrote:
On 20/12/16 12:55, Tim+ wrote:


Fashions in the use of apostrophes have changed. As long as they
help to clarify rather than confuse, precisely how they are used
in any particular situation relating to plurals seems to me to
be of lesser importance.

Tim

Totally wisdom from this Tim+. A nugget of truth in the dirty
dull swamp of ukdiy.
Tim W

I'd love either of you to explain this. How does adding an
apostrophe where not appropriate help clarity? An example would
suffice.

How many i's are there in "initial"?

That is an appropriate use.

How many is are there in "initial"?

Without the apostrophe that sentence makes no sense. There is no
such noun as 'is'.

You asked for an example. You have proved that my example was
appropriate.

Not so. My request was for an example of where the use of an
unnecessary one clarified rather than confused.

In your example, one sentence makes no sense at all.

You have it back to front. The use of an unnecessary apostrophe in the
first sentence clarified what was meant. Its lack in the second
sentence served to confuse.

Or put another way, the apostrophe in the first sentence is unnecessary
for normal grammar rules. "i's" is neither possessive nor an
abbreviation, so one wouldn't normally use one there. Compare to "How
many bears are there in Alaska?" - you wouldn't write "bear's". However
putting one in helps clarity. Thus adding the apostrophe where not
appropriate helps clarity.

Exactly.

Except it doesn't help clarity. It introduces a possessive where none
exists.

In article ,
Bob Eager wrote:
How many i's are there in "initial"?

That is an appropriate use.

How many is are there in "initial"?

Without the apostrophe that sentence makes no sense. There is no such
noun as 'is'.

You asked for an example. You have proved that my example was
appropriate.

Not so. My request was for an example of where the use of an unnecessary
one clarified rather than confused.

In your example, one sentence makes no sense at all.

You have it back to front. The use of an unnecessary apostrophe in the
first sentence clarified what was meant. Its lack in the second sentence
served to confuse.

We'll have to differ, then. One sentence makes perfect sense. The other
one non at all, since 'is' doesn't exist as a noun.

I'm sure there must be a better example somewhere.

The use of an apostrophe on a plural merely shows a lack of education.

When you get to words in common use like its and it's it merely needs a
bit of thought.

--
*Half the people in the world are below average.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 20/12/16 17:54, wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 15:24:01 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Irrelevant. There wont *be* any lightbulbs for sale if we leave the EU!

I don't see why not, and anyway I think my mum's still got a box of gas mantles "just in case".

Owain

My Mum too. She has a cupboard of tinned food, candles, matches, camping
gas and stuff in case Arthur Scargill ever comes back.
TW

In article ,
Clive George wrote:
Or put another way, the apostrophe in the first sentence is unnecessary
for normal grammar rules. "i's" is neither possessive nor an
abbreviation, so one wouldn't normally use one there. Compare to "How
many bears are there in Alaska?" - you wouldn't write "bear's".
However putting one in helps clarity. Thus adding the apostrophe where
not appropriate helps clarity.

I don't see that at all. The only possible time adding an apostrophe to a
plural *might* aid clarity would be where that singular noun ends in an
's' Like say bus. But then the plural is buses anyway. ;-)

--
*The longest recorded flightof a chicken is thirteen seconds *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Bob Eager wrote:
Or put another way, the apostrophe in the first sentence is unnecessary
for normal grammar rules. "i's" is neither possessive nor an
abbreviation, so one wouldn't normally use one there. Compare to "How
many bears are there in Alaska?" - you wouldn't write "bear's". However
putting one in helps clarity. Thus adding the apostrophe where not
appropriate helps clarity.

Exactly.

I'd say even most kids would know the plural of bear is bears.

I'd love an example that really does clarify it's a plural. As the 'are'
in the sentence does that anyway.

--
*By the time a man is wise enough to watch his step, he's too old to go anywhere.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
TimW wrote:
On 20/12/16 17:54, wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 15:24:01 UTC, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
Irrelevant. There wont *be* any lightbulbs for sale if we leave the
EU!

I don't see why not, and anyway I think my mum's still got a box of
gas mantles "just in case".

Owain

My Mum too. She has a cupboard of tinned food, candles, matches, camping
gas and stuff in case Arthur Scargill ever comes back.

She should really give them to a food bank. Many more of those around now
than in 'Scargill's' day.

--
*Money isn't everything, but it sure keeps the kids in touch.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 21/12/2016 02:13, Clive George wrote:
On 21/12/2016 00:38, Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 21 Dec 2016 00:26:56 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 15:37:54 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 14:24:27 +0000, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
TimW wrote:
On 20/12/16 12:55, Tim+ wrote:


Fashions in the use of apostrophes have changed. As long as
they help to clarify rather than confuse, precisely how they
are used in any particular situation relating to plurals seems
to me to be of lesser importance.

Tim

Totally wisdom from this Tim+. A nugget of truth in the dirty
dull swamp of ukdiy.
Tim W

I'd love either of you to explain this. How does adding an
apostrophe where not appropriate help clarity? An example would
suffice.

How many i's are there in "initial"?

That is an appropriate use.

How many is are there in "initial"?

Without the apostrophe that sentence makes no sense. There is no such
noun as 'is'.

You asked for an example. You have proved that my example was
appropriate.

Not so. My request was for an example of where the use of an unnecessary
one clarified rather than confused.

In your example, one sentence makes no sense at all.

You have it back to front. The use of an unnecessary apostrophe in the
first sentence clarified what was meant. Its lack in the second sentence
served to confuse.

Or put another way, the apostrophe in the first sentence is unnecessary
for normal grammar rules. "i's" is neither possessive nor an
abbreviation, so one wouldn't normally use one there. Compare to "How
many bears are there in Alaska?" - you wouldn't write "bear's".
However putting one in helps clarity. Thus adding the apostrophe where
not appropriate helps clarity.


"How many of the letter i appear in initial?" is the way to clear it up.
Adding an apostrophe obviously does not.

On 21/12/2016 11:19, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Bob Eager wrote:
Or put another way, the apostrophe in the first sentence is unnecessary
for normal grammar rules. "i's" is neither possessive nor an
abbreviation, so one wouldn't normally use one there. Compare to "How
many bears are there in Alaska?" - you wouldn't write "bear's". However
putting one in helps clarity. Thus adding the apostrophe where not
appropriate helps clarity.

Exactly.

I'd say even most kids would know the plural of bear is bears.

I'd love an example that really does clarify it's a plural. As the 'are'
in the sentence does that anyway.


Hmm?
The answer is brown bear, polar bear, grizzle bear, etc.

to "How many bear are there in Alaska?" without the s.

(PS I know some of them aren't in Alaska.)

In article . com,
dennis@home wrote:
How many i's are there in "initial"?

That is an appropriate use.

How many is are there in "initial"?

Without the apostrophe that sentence makes no sense. There is no such
noun as 'is'.

You asked for an example. You have proved that my example was
appropriate.

Not so. My request was for an example of where the use of an unnecessary
one clarified rather than confused.

In your example, one sentence makes no sense at all.

You have it back to front. The use of an unnecessary apostrophe in the
first sentence clarified what was meant. Its lack in the second sentence
served to confuse.

Or put another way, the apostrophe in the first sentence is unnecessary
for normal grammar rules. "i's" is neither possessive nor an
abbreviation, so one wouldn't normally use one there. Compare to "How
many bears are there in Alaska?" - you wouldn't write "bear's".
However putting one in helps clarity. Thus adding the apostrophe where
not appropriate helps clarity.


"How many of the letter i appear in initial?" is the way to clear it up.
Adding an apostrophe obviously does not.

Only to those with a *very* limited grasp of English. Both spoken and read.
Even the pronunciation is different between 'i's' and 'is'

--
*Two wrongs are only the beginning *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article m,
dennis@home wrote:
On 21/12/2016 11:19, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Bob Eager wrote:
Or put another way, the apostrophe in the first sentence is unnecessary
for normal grammar rules. "i's" is neither possessive nor an
abbreviation, so one wouldn't normally use one there. Compare to "How
many bears are there in Alaska?" - you wouldn't write "bear's". However
putting one in helps clarity. Thus adding the apostrophe where not
appropriate helps clarity.

Exactly.

I'd say even most kids would know the plural of bear is bears.

I'd love an example that really does clarify it's a plural. As the
'are' in the sentence does that anyway.


Hmm?
The answer is brown bear, polar bear, grizzle bear, etc.

That is *not* the answer to 'how many bears are there in Alaska' Which
would be a number. That answers 'what types of bear in Alaska'

What would your answer be to 'how many people are there in Alaska?' Those
races resident there?

to "How many bear are there in Alaska?" without the s.

That would make more sense if asking about types.

In other words an apostrophe does absolutely nothing to help clarity -
quite the reverse.

(PS I know some of them aren't in Alaska.)

--
*See no evil, Hear no evil, Date no evil.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

TimW wrote:
On 20/12/16 17:54, wrote:
On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 15:24:01 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Irrelevant. There wont *be* any lightbulbs for sale if we leave the EU!

I don't see why not, and anyway I think my mum's still got a box of
gas mantles "just in case".

Owain

My Mum too. She has a cupboard of tinned food, candles, matches, camping
gas and stuff in case Arthur Scargill ever comes back.
TW

Now the problem is do gooder politicians.

On 21/12/2016 11:16, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Clive George wrote:
Or put another way, the apostrophe in the first sentence is unnecessary
for normal grammar rules. "i's" is neither possessive nor an
abbreviation, so one wouldn't normally use one there. Compare to "How
many bears are there in Alaska?" - you wouldn't write "bear's".
However putting one in helps clarity. Thus adding the apostrophe where
not appropriate helps clarity.

I don't see that at all. The only possible time adding an apostrophe to a
plural *might* aid clarity would be where that singular noun ends in an
's' Like say bus. But then the plural is buses anyway. ;-)

The example sentence was

How many i's are there in "initial"?

Are you really saying that the apostophe there isn't adding clarity?