Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #3037

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

From	Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject	Re: OT "sic"? (was Re: Binary Search)
Date	2011-04-11 22:16 +0100
Organization	Stack Usenet News Service
Message-ID	<alpine.DEB.2.00.1104112209030.2081@urchin.earth.li> (permalink)
References	(3 earlier) <inielt$uok$1@news.albasani.net> <90gfdtFmkU2@mid.individual.net> <e380412e-ebc2-440d-96f4-4fc814c6f49b@i14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com> <HOOdndwQGZv8zz7QnZ2dnUVZ87-dnZ2d@telenor.com> <eea54a30-ed34-4bfc-b3d0-1bd9af1c0ef7@v10g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On Mon, 11 Apr 2011, Lew wrote:

> Leif Roar Moldskred wrote:
>> Lew wrote:
>>> But not "K" or "T".
>>
>> That's a matter of style: some style guides recommend the use of an 
>> apostrophe to mark plurals of individual letters, some do not. See 
>> "Eat, Shoots & Leaves -- The zero tolerance approach to punctuation" by 
>> Lynne Truss for a funny but in-depth discussion of the uses of 
>> apostrophes.
>
> Yes, it is a matter of style.  Duh.  That's why I cited a *style*
> guide.  There's a direct correlation there.
>
> Yes, styles vary.

In which case the use of 'sic' is dubious. You are not marking something 
that is wrong, you are marking something that you wouldn't write that way 
yourself. If you start doing that consistently, i think you will soon find 
that your square bracket keys have worn out.

To be honest, the use of sic in quoted text in a mail or news post at all 
is dubious. sic is used to indicate that there has been no error in 
transcription; when it is a machine doing the transcription, it is 
redundant.

tom

-- 
Taking care of business

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