Debate : 9531


Off-Topic / Debate / 9531	9530 \| 9532

Subject:	Re: Stuff (Was: some other stuff)
Newsgroups:	lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun
Date:	Wed, 21 Mar 2001 17:51:13 GMT
Viewed:	342 times

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Maggie Cambron writes: > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford writes: > > > > And another pet hate is people who type an acronym, then write the meaning > > after it! Why not just leave the acronym out altogether? > > > > ROSCO > > > > LMKWYT (Let Me Know Wh....Oh, poop) The point is to explain the acronym the first time you use it, then just re-use the acronym where it needs to be repeated. It's actually required by the guidelines for government writing in the UK (or was that an Official Secret? Damn, I can never remember). > Okay, if attorneys general, courts martial and Rolls Royce are plural forms, > shouldn't the plural of AFOL be AF'sOL? Or are the rules different for > acronyms? > > Maggie C. Rolls-Royce isn't a plural. The company is named Rolls-Royce, after the founders, not 'Roll-Royce'. Foreigners. Oh, and while I'm here that 'All your base' stuff - some friends of a friend recently stood behind Richard Blackwood on MTV Europe, and held up some 'All your base are belong to us' signs behind the window of the London studio. Blackwood's response: "It's crack. Stay off the drugs!" (Got an MPEG somewhere...). Jason J Railton Jason J Railton

Message has 2 Replies:

		Re: Stuff (Was: some other stuff)
(...) You raise an interesting etymological point--who determines the "proper" pluralization? We're all well aware of the LEGO/Legos issue; while a manufacturer may wish a certain plural form to be used, what happens if no one uses it (or if enough (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)

		Re: Stuff (Was: some other stuff)
(...) Sure. I can see the point if you do this and you're gonna use it multiple times within a single document (lawyers do it all the time!), and you can even do it using a glossary. What I detest is people who use an acronym ONCE and follow it (...) (23 years ago, 21-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Message is in Reply To:

		Acronyms (Was Re: Lugnet Guide a lot less convenient today)
(...) Okay, if attorneys general, courts martial and Rolls Royce are plural forms, shouldn't the plural of AFOL be AF'sOL? Or are the rules different for acronyms? And speaking of acronyms, hasn't it already been argued that technically in order to (...) (23 years ago, 12-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)

85 Messages in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact

Custom Search