#20334 - 02/26/01 11:10 PM
apostrophes
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
My local grocery store is called "Gelson's", and i recently received an ad which included something to the effect of "Gelsons' goal is to.... etc." Is this correct? How do you make a possessive proper noun into a double possessive, of sorts? do you simply drop the initial apostrophe, as they did? surely you wouldn't say "Gelson's' goal", right? I'd defer to their expertise had the ad not been riddled with the it's/its mistake (YART). TIA 
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#20335 - 02/26/01 11:30 PM
Re: apostrophes
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 04/09/00
Posts: 3065
Loc: Jakarta
|
Technically "Gelson's' goal" would be the correct form, but it would be far better to avoid the problem and say, e.g., "the goal of Gelson's". If it comes to that why not just "our goal"?
Bingley
_________________________
Bingley
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20336 - 02/26/01 11:38 PM
Re: apostrophes
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
You mean to say "Gelson's's goal" would also be correct? *wow*.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20337 - 02/27/01 06:17 AM
Re: apostrophes
|
old hand
Registered: 12/20/00
Posts: 1055
Loc: Berlin
|
'Gelson's' is short for Gelson's place or shop right?
So having two possessives in a row it would be:
Gelson's Shop's goal
Obviously 'Goals of Gelson's (Shop)' would be less of a mouthful.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20339 - 02/27/01 11:31 AM
Re: apostrophes
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
..and while we're on the subject of multiple apostrophes: Is I'd've a word? it's used orally quite a bit, but looks awfully strange written down. I'd've simply looked it up, but i figured it'd be easier just to pick your collective brains. well, that plus i'm almost a member.... 
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20340 - 02/27/01 11:40 AM
Re: apostrophes
|
veteran
Registered: 11/22/00
Posts: 1289
|
I'd've
My personal take on this is that if a word exists in oral use, it can always be written down -- that's what writing is for; ergo, it always has the potential to exist in written form and when somebody does write it, there it is. On the other hand, I hold fast to the notion that there is never more than one apostrophe in a word. Notwithstanding that there are two elisions in the present case, I would suppress one and spell it "I'dve".
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20341 - 02/27/01 11:46 AM
Re: apostrophes
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 11/25/00
Posts: 3439
Loc: New England, USA
|
My personal take on this is that if a word exists in oral use, it can always be written down
-------------------------------------------------
Agreed. Especially when you write conversation as in books. Generally, on this Board, I think we try to write as we'd speak, as we lack the voical tonality to enforce or modify the tone of a post.
wow
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20343 - 02/27/01 03:39 PM
Re: apostrophes
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 11/25/00
Posts: 3439
Loc: New England, USA
|
One fumble finger and I am in the soup.
Now I know how poor TEd feels.
vocal vocal vocal!!!
wow
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20344 - 02/28/01 08:29 AM
I'd've
|
enthusiast
Registered: 12/18/00
Posts: 393
Loc: London
|
Double contractions like this don't occur in standard print. I do sometimes use it.
My rule of thumb is to do it if it's needed to show what I say. Written "I have" is pronounced as two distinct words: I don't read it as "I've". Nor do I read "do not" as "don't".
But given written "I'd have", I'd pronounce it as "I'd've", not (normally) with a distinct "have". So there's no need to supply the second contraction in writing, when the standard form "I'd have" is pronounced in the way you want.
That said, I've noticed my use of "I'd've" is increasing, when I'm writing more colloquially.
In the same way, I might write "Elizabeth'll do it", where in serious print you only get pronoun + contraction.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20347 - 02/28/01 09:59 AM
Re: I'd've
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 09/28/00
Posts: 2888
|
Oh they write all right. They write and write and write and write until the whole point is lost in a jumble of words so obscure that it is quite unintelligible to the average human being.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20352 - 02/28/01 12:46 PM
Re: I'd've
|
veteran
Registered: 11/22/00
Posts: 1289
|
formal writing
I tend to agree, sort of. I view written English as different from spoken English, more formal. Hence, I use few contractions in writing, which means that my style, as people are always telling me, is stiff, pedantic, pretentious, elegant, old-fashioned, (choose one or more), depending on who is doing the telling. However, I have developed a new, freer style more like spoken English for e-mail and chat-room purposes, which I feel are supposed to be a sort of written conversation.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20353 - 02/28/01 01:27 PM
Re: Y'all'll
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 12/01/00
Posts: 13653
|
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20354 - 02/28/01 01:38 PM
Re: Y'all'll
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20356 - 02/28/01 02:41 PM
Re: formal writing
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 01/18/01
Posts: 13858
|
Do you mean to say lawyers are not still paid by the word?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20359 - 02/28/01 04:14 PM
Re: Y'all'll etc
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
well, that's because y'all'vent've had enough practice =)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20360 - 02/28/01 04:21 PM
pronouncing
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 03/15/00
Posts: 6511
Loc: lower upstate New York
|
Faldage, Not bad for a damyankee  Bridget, You lose this? '
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20361 - 02/28/01 04:23 PM
Re: pronouncing
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
ah... yes.... why thanks, anna. it fell off of my poppyseed bun. good thing it landed here, and not in my keyboard.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20362 - 03/01/01 04:27 AM
Re: I'd've
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 11/13/00
Posts: 3146
Loc: Northamptonshire, England
|
Sparteye wrote: Well, if we just wrote it in plain English so everyone could understand it, we'd write ourselves right out of our jobs, now, wouldn't we? We're not as dumb as we look!But, my good fellow, your profession will, I assure you, be first against the wall when I get this revolution thingummyjig off the ground! Now, where did I put that spanner? I think I'm sitting on the book of instructions. And just who is this Che Guevara chappie anyway, and why do I have to have 1,000 black berets and grow a beard?
_________________________
The idiot also known as Capfka ...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20363 - 03/01/01 07:33 AM
Re: lawyers
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 03/15/00
Posts: 6511
Loc: lower upstate New York
|
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20364 - 03/01/01 09:56 AM
Re: lawyers
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 01/18/01
Posts: 13858
|
As Robespierre said to Danton, CK, the mons veneris may be your Tarpeian Rock!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20365 - 03/02/01 04:14 AM
Re: lawyers
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 11/13/00
Posts: 3146
Loc: Northamptonshire, England
|
As Robespierre said to Danton, CK, the mons veneris may be your Tarpeian Rock!You can't get thrown off what you don't get to climb ... I was addressing a principle, not a gender!
_________________________
The idiot also known as Capfka ...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20366 - 03/02/01 09:07 AM
the execution of privates, or something
|
Pooh-Bah
Registered: 01/05/01
Posts: 1773
|
Capital Kiwi is in good company in perceiving the elimination of lawyers as an essential element of revolution. Shakespeare's revolutionary villain said it best,
"The first thing we do, is kill all the lawyers."
As to the fellow part, I've never minded crossing gender terms, and I never take offense when offense isn't intended. I have completely enjoyed the camaraderie, on this and other boards, of being addressed as "guv," "mate," "fellow", and (oh my gosh!) "dude." Keep 'em coming.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20367 - 03/03/01 10:46 PM
Re: apostrophes
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 07/17/00
Posts: 3467
Loc: Marion NC
|
.Now I know how poor TEd feels.
With his fingertips
_________________________
TEd
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20368 - 03/04/01 10:18 AM
Re: the execution of privates, or something
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 11/25/00
Posts: 3439
Loc: New England, USA
|
Capital Kiwi is in good company in perceiving the elimination of lawyers as an essential element of revolution.
OTOH, when you are out in cold, deserted, needing help, the two people most welcome, depending on circumstances, are:
a Mechanic or a Lawyer!
wow
P.S. AnnaS : here's one to answer ... just trying to help you reach your goal!
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20370 - 03/04/01 11:38 PM
Re: Y'all'll etc
|
member
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 116
Loc: Jerusalem, ISRAEL
|
In reply to:
Nuthin' like furriners tryin' to do the fyutchah pehfect in Suthrin. We do admire y'all's attempts, though, darlins.
To this, I will certainly agree, and I am, of course, able to read what you have written given that I am from Nawth Care-liiiiiiiiiinah, although I never in my liiiiiife actually talked like that - except for the effect!
Do ya think we two ought to explain (given the ongoing economic boom being enjoyed by the South) to all these others how we actually DID win the war???
One last question of importance - are you a native Atlantan or a transplant, and do you live IN Atlanta or in one of those fancy new suburbs?
Shoshannah
_________________________
suzanne pomeranz, tourism consultant
jerusalem, israel - suztours@gmail.com
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20371 - 03/05/01 05:45 PM
Re: Y'all'll etc
|
old hand
Registered: 07/03/00
Posts: 1094
Loc: Cincinnati & Loveland, Ohio, U...
|
Do ya think we two ought to explain (given the ongoing economic boom being enjoyed by the South) to all these others how we actually DID win the war???
Gee, Reaganomics took a few years to start helping the economy, but I didn't realize that the South's "winning" the Civil War was finally helping the economy after 140 years.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20372 - 03/05/01 06:00 PM
Re: Y'all'll etc
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 01/18/01
Posts: 13858
|
While the North's superior economy decided a war over a hundred years ago, the South's economy has grown while the North's has stagnated. Too much Yankee money went South.
But it strengthened the Nation, and that is good.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20373 - 03/05/01 06:41 PM
Re: Y'all'll etc
|
old hand
Registered: 07/03/00
Posts: 1094
Loc: Cincinnati & Loveland, Ohio, U...
|
the South's economy has grown while the North's has stagnated.
I wouldn't say that. The economic boom is all over, and we seem to be quite comfortable in the Midwest, except that we have the highest gas prices. All California's gotten from the economic boom is huge inflation. And I think the main reason so many people moved south is due to a warmer climate.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20374 - 03/06/01 03:52 PM
Agree to Disagree
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 12/24/00
Posts: 2658
Loc: Chicago
|
"I wouldn't say that. The economic boom is all over..." - I agree, everybody I know says it is easier to live every day life (the traffic boom here in the city will be 'splayn i't'y'all) "All California's gotten from the economic boom is huge inflation." - It's about time they pay extra for the extra ego pollution (ducking from Bridget96 emoticon) "Gee, Reaganomics took a few years to start helping the economy" - don't get me started on that fallacy... how much do YOU (the current collective YOU) expect to pay for 8 years of college (inflation my, but). People are moving to warmer climates to escape the inflated gas prices that the Gas profiteers are used to because of Reaganomics... ... aside from this issue, is it not mainly the major metro's that are enjoying economic boom in the south and not the rural remainder?
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20375 - 03/06/01 04:10 PM
Re: Agree to Disagree
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Bridget smiles amiably and assures *mr* musick that no offense was taken, then executes a nice clean roundhouse to the kidneys. Don't forget, in addition to exercising our egos, we have a fascination with healthy pastimes such as kickboxing.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20376 - 03/06/01 05:58 PM
Re: Agree to Disagree
|
old hand
Registered: 07/03/00
Posts: 1094
Loc: Cincinnati & Loveland, Ohio, U...
|
"Gee, Reaganomics took a few years to start helping the economy" - don't get me started on that fallacy...
Any economist or historian would tell you that "Reaganomics" is an effective way of improving the economy. It's like a train engine that takes a while to get started, but then gets rolling along. Reagan's economic policies are what caused the successes of the '90s. Clinton was intelligent and didn't mess with it and then took all the credit.
As for Reagan creating the current national debt, it was a very effective method of crippling the Russians and ending the Cold War. Half of the reason the debt skyrocketed was because he had a Democratic congress that insisted of spending so much money on other issues while lowering taxes. (We often don't give the Congress enough credit when they're usually responsible for the state of the nation.)
(And Reaganomics is just the supply-side economics started by Alexander Hamilton, who just happens to be one of the only two non-presidents on US paper currency.)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20377 - 03/06/01 06:19 PM
Re: Agree to Disagree
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 08/12/00
Posts: 3409
|
Any economist or historian would tell you that "Reaganomics" is an effective way of improving the economy. Given the subjectivity intrinsic to those disciplines, one could always find a practitioner of either or both to say whatever one wished to hear. The one thing that can be said with certainty is that economists and historians are truly ayleurs, in the acronymic sense of the word.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#20378 - 03/06/01 06:33 PM
Tickle - vs trickle
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 12/24/00
Posts: 2658
Loc: Chicago
|
My comment was of a personal nature based upon my experience of education costs doubling when the decision was made that certain grants were a "waste of money"! Perpetuating the illusion that supporting only supply side economics is a good thing (ie, promoting commmercial goods to a point that they becomes consumables) builds a "false economy", or, more specifically, a specific view of economics... which brings us to politics. Talk to hand here - and me privately. JazzO, funny how you answer a comment with a after it faster than one with a question mark.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20379 - 03/06/01 07:45 PM
Re: Tickle - vs trickle
|
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 01/18/01
Posts: 13858
|
I am unable to understand the justification for college yearly tuition jumping from $400 in 1935 to $20,000 today.
The latter figure is hearsay, but I think it is nearly that.At least I have not deliberately exaggerated.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20381 - 03/07/01 06:43 AM
Re: Tickle - vs trickle
|
old hand
Registered: 07/03/00
Posts: 1094
Loc: Cincinnati & Loveland, Ohio, U...
|
college yearly tuition jumping from $400 in 1935 to $20,000 today.I can't say much about the price for college in 1935 because it was some 50 years before I was born, but the public university that I'll be attending next year is about $5,500 per year for tuition. Room and board, tuition, books, etc. is a total of $60,000 over four years. (That's how much they give for their full scholarship, which I wouldn't mind receiving. ) I think part of the reason for the soaring price of college is that more people want to go and everyone is realizing how valuable a college education is in the current job market. And musick, there wasn't a after the main comment that I replied to. But about the question marked statement, I think it's obvious that the economic boom is happening mainly in the 'burbs around the big cities. The inner cities aren't doing too well. The city of Cincinnati, for one, had a population decrease of around 30,000 over the last 10 years, while the suburbs are doing well. Good ol' urban sprawl.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#20382 - 03/07/01 11:34 AM
Re: Tickle - vs trickle
|
veteran
Registered: 11/22/00
Posts: 1289
|
cost increases
The first thing you need to keep in mind is the increase in the cost of living and the decline in the value of money. In 1935, when my parents graduated from high school, my father went to work for $14 per week and that wasn't bad money for a single man. You could raise a family on $25 per week if you were frugal. A pair of Florsheim shoes cost $7.50; a good suit was $25.00; a new Chevrolet was $650; a small row house was $2000 to $4000.
As late as 1957, when I started college, $50 a week was not a bad salary and you could certainly live on it. In my first 2 years, I paid $600 per semester tuition; room and meals was another $300, books came to about $50 (a book costing $10 was high priced). By the time I graduated, in 1961, it had gone up about $100 per year. Now, the tuition at Johns Hopkins is, I believe, about $22,000 per year for an undergraduate.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
8423 Members
16 Forums
13686 Topics
209757 Posts
Max Online: 3341 @ 12/09/11 02:15 PM
|
|
|
1 registered (wofahulicodoc),
16
Guests and
2
Spiders online. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
Search
Now kin y'all pernounce them wehds?
Previous Topic
Index