Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #3059

Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search)

Show all headers | View raw

In article <e380412e-ebc2-440d-96f4-4fc814c6f49b@i14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
Lew  <lew@lewscanon.com> wrote:
> On Apr 11, 9:53 am, blm...@myrealbox.com <blm...@myrealbox.com> wrote:
> > In article <inielt$uo...@news.albasani.net>, Lew  <no...@lewscanon.com> wrote:
> > > Mike Schilling wrote:
> > > > Fair point. This was simpler before generics, when the Comparator could accept
> > > > either K's [sic] or T's [sic] :-)
> >
> > "[sic]"?  
> >
> > My understanding is that while it's less common than it used to be
> > to form the plurals of multiletter acronyms [*] with apostrophes
> > (e.g., "CDs" rather than "CD's"), apostrophes are still advised
> > for forming plurals of single letters, to avoid ambiguity in the
> > case of A and I (and possibly some others I'm not thinking of).
> >
> 
> But not "K" or "T".

Eh.  I guess my thinking is that it's simpler to have one rule for
plurals of single letters, rather than having one rule for the ones
where there might be ambiguity and another rule for the others.

> > Can you cite any authoritative recommendation for leaving out
> > the apostrophes here?
> >
> > [*] Or initialisms, for the pedantic?
> >
> > [ snip ]
> >
> > > In the simpler way, you compare Ts and Ks willy-nilly, without really saying
> > > so.  Sure it works, but it's hidden.
> >
> > [ snip ]
> >
> 
> <http://ethnicity.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Writing/p.html#plural>
> "Resist the urge to put an apostrophe before the s in a plural,
> whether in common or proper nouns. The term for this vulgar error is
> the 'greengrocer's apostrophe,' ..."

I don't agree, however, that using apostrophes to form plurals of
single letters is in this category of "vulgar error".  Indeed,
your cited authority goes on to say that this is a matter of
"house style", and:

> <http://ethnicity.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Writing/a.html#apostrophe>
> "My preference: 

*Preference*.

> don't use apostrophes to make abbreviations plural '
> not 'They took their SAT's,' but 'They took their SATs.' The only
> exception is when having no apostrophe might be confusing: 'Two As' is
> ambiguous (it might be read as the word as); make it 'Two A's.'
> 
> Refer to his citations and C.V. for transitive authority.

Anyway, thanks for the reply/citation.  Very interesting.  

I do think that if you're going to use [sic] at all in quoted
text -- which I'm inclined to dislike [*] -- it should be reserved
for egregious errors, not for matters of style.  But whatever.

[*] Perhaps because to me any editing of quoted text, with the
exception of replacing words or phrases with "[ snip ]" or the
like, has unpleasant associations with a poster who shall remain
nameless.

-- 
B. L. Massingill
ObDisclaimer:  I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Binary Search Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-04-02 22:00 +1300
  Re: Binary Search Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2011-04-02 05:07 -0500
    Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-02 07:59 -0700
      Re: Binary Search Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2011-04-02 10:37 -0500
        Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-02 08:57 -0700
          Re: Binary Search Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-04-03 12:40 +1200
  Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-02 07:58 -0700
    Re: Binary Search Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-02 11:11 -0400
      Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-02 08:58 -0700
    Re: Binary Search Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-03 00:11 +0100
      Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-02 16:52 -0700
        Re: Binary Search Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-03 18:50 +0100
          Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-03 12:01 -0700
            Re: Binary Search Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-03 22:39 +0100
              Re: Binary Search "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-03 16:37 -0700
                Re: Binary Search Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-06 15:24 -0400
                OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm@myrealbox.com> - 2011-04-11 13:53 +0000
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Lew <lew@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-11 11:45 -0700
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2011-04-11 14:11 -0500
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Lew <lew@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-11 13:48 -0700
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-11 22:16 +0100
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-04-11 17:54 -0400
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-04-11 23:35 +0100
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2011-04-11 21:41 -0500
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm@myrealbox.com> - 2011-04-14 10:11 +0000
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Jerry Gerrone <scuzwalla@gmail.com> - 2011-04-14 20:12 -0700
                Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search) Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-04-26 22:53 +0100
      Re: Binary Search Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-04-05 16:01 +0100

csiph-web