| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Maggie Cambron writes:
> 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?
Hmm.. I've heard the phrase "so-and-so drives a Rolls," which is like
saying "so-and-so drives a cars." Strange.
I would argue that the plural of AFOL is AFOL, since "F" can stand for
"Fans" as easily as it can for "Fan." I've often heard the term RPMs for
revolutions per minute, which suffers from the same problem. Unless, of
course, one takes "AFOL" to have become a word unto itself, so that AFOLs is
an acceptable plural form of the coined word.
> And speaking of acronyms, hasn't it already been argued that technically in
> order to be an acronym the series of letters must form a word (usual example
> being radar)?
That's been my understanding; if the letters don't form a word it's an
abbreviation rather than an acronym, though the two terms are blurring.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
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
|
|
|
|
