'Proper' grammar 1

[bekibutton]

I've just started studying Latin and Ancient Greek, and I'm totally puzzled by most of the new grammatical terms that I've been introduced to.

Seems that (in the UK at least), the older generations were taught a whole lot more about grammer than I was (I'm in my mid-twenties). We basically did verbs ('doing' words), adjectives ('describing' words) and nouns ('naming' words), even at secondary (high) school that was as complicated as it got.

Now I've been introduced to adverbs, pronouns, prepositions... Also 'cases' of nouns - nominative, vocative, accusative, genitive, dative and ablative. Oh, and those things in Latin called declensions, which are completely eluding me at the moment...

I'm no idiot, and I consider my English skills to be very good, but I'm currently frustrated by how little I was taught of the 'rules'. I'd have liked to know the rules in order to understand how to break them and how to use English properly.

I'm just wondering what people's educational experiences with English grammar are like. I know a lot of you here have done 'the rules' thoroughly, are there any other people who never learnt them?

Becki

--------------------------------------
I was gonna take over the world but got distracted by something shiny

 

[risby]

That was a good book, BTW.

Yes, but just after she's been ranting on about taking up arms against those who misuse apostrophes (e.g to pluralize abbreviations, as in CD's) she writes about apostrophes as a printer's convention (i.e. as though there was only one printer and it was his convention).

Hoist by her own petard, me thinks!

Fifth from last line on page 29 of my edition.

==========================================

abjure hippopotomonstrosesquipedaliophobia

 

[philhege]

Phil H.
-----------
A virtual machine ate my accounting data. I transferred it to a physical box, then I beat it to smithereens with a sledgehammer. I feel better.

 

[ESquared]

Printer's convention" is problematic but at least avoids the ambiguity present in "printer convention" where we might wonder if some HP LaserJets will be in attendance (the possessive implies it is not the mechanical equipment we're talking about). "printers convention" is not much better. Better is probably "printing convention."

What do you think? Except no printing will be going on.

I think of a Robotics Convention. We wouldn't call it:
- a Roboticist Convention (since the subject is robotics, not roboticists, unless it was actually a sociology convention where robotocists would in fact be the topic of interest)
- or a Robotocist's Convention (the convention is owned by a single person)
- or a Robotting Convention (where participants engage in robotting, whatever that is)
- or a Robot Convention (which presumably robots attend.
- or a Robots Convention (it's awkward and again might be for robots to attend).

So what's the equivalent word for the printing profession to robotics? Typography Convention?

 

[risby]

She didn't mean a "gathering" of printers, ESquared. She meant the way apostrophes are used is a convention amongst printers. It is a practice that printers use. The word convention is used to mean that most, possibly all, printers have adopted this practice. But it is not a law; just a convention.

A practice of printers is a printers' practice. The indefinite article "a" agrees in number with the (singular) practice/convention but there are several printers. So the apostrophe, conventionally, comes after the "s" used to indicate the plural of printer.

Unless, of course, we're talkin' 'bout a unilateral practice adopted by someone called Mr Printers in which case it would be Mr Printers's convention ...

Stop me now someone ...

==========================================

abjure hippopotomonstrosesquipedaliophobia

 

[SantaMufasa]

Adding to the problem in the above example(s) is the ambiguity of the word "Convention", itself:

Main Entry: con·ven·tion
Pronunciation: \k?n-?ven(t)-sh?n\
Function: noun
...
2b: an assembly of persons met for a common purpose;
...
3 a: usage or custom...
b: a rule of conduct or behavior c: a practice in bidding or playing that conveys information
d: an established technique, practice, or device...

Usually, context helps remove ambiguity from a word with multiple meanings. But in the above case, without additional context, we cannot easily determine if we mean an assembly of printers or robotics practitioners or if we mean a technique that printers or robotics practitioners use.


If I want to communicate precisely, and without ambiguity, I might use this type of construction:

...a technique that printers(/roboticists) use...
...a convention that printers(/roboticists) attend...

If a sentence structure results in implicit ambiguity, I re-construct the sentence to eliminate the ambiguity.


"There is more than one method by which to remove the integument from a feline." <grin>

Mufasa
(aka Dave of Sandy, Utah, USA)
[I provide low-cost, remote Database Administration services: www.dasages.com]

 

[Stella740pl]

Robotics Convention? Robots in attendance? OMG.
I hope, no one on this forum imagines something similar or feels any ambiguity when hears of (variable and function) naming convention.

But I tend to agree that "printing convention" would be a better choice of words.

 

[CajunCenturion]

A practice of printers is a printers' practice. The indefinite article "a" agrees in number with the (singular) practice/convention but there are several printers. So the apostrophe, conventionally, comes after the "s" used to indicate the plural of printer.

Unless you view 'printer' as a collective noun referring to the printers as a group, in which case the singular "printer's convention" is quite reasonable.


--------------
Good Luck
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read
FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[risby]

Unless you view 'printer' as a collective noun referring to the printers as a group

You are, of course, allowed to redefine English words in any way you wish. Heaven forfend that I should lay down the law or appeal to standards in this respect :-o

==========================================

abjure hippopotomonstrosesquipedaliophobia

 

[CajunCenturion]

Ouch, such vitriol.

I don't think anything is being redefined. Contextually, industry groups are often referred to collectively by their trade, as in &quot;a printers group&quot;, which by it's nature is singular. The full possessive form would read &quot;a printers group's convention&quot;, which is shortened to &quot;printer's convention&quot;.

I also think there is a semantic difference between &quot;printers' convention&quot; and &quot;printer's convention&quot;. In the former case (plural possessive), the implication is that although there is convention, the printers are acting individually, which calls for the plural possessive. In the latter case, (singular possessive), the printers are acting as a unified group with respect to the convention which calls for the singular possessive. I think both punctuations are equally correct, but with slightly different meanings.

For me, I will give the benefit of doubt to Ms. Truss that she knew precisely what she was doing when she chose the singular possessive form of this contextually collective noun.


--------------
Good Luck
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read
FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[Stella740pl]

Google search shows that CajunCenturion is right, and "printer's convention" is the correct and common usage meaning a commonly agreed practice of printers as an industry group.

Even though most of the links talk about different practices, the term "printer's convention" is usually used in scientific journals and professional books.

 

[AnotherHiggins]

Eats, Shoots & Leaves" reminded me of this thread and, from a link in that thread, this New Yorker review that points out several grammatical mistakes within the book.

The first punctuation mistake in “Eats, Shoots & Leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation”…appears in the dedication, where a nonrestrictive clause is not preceded by a comma. It is a wild ride downhill from there.

[tt]_____
[blue]-John[/blue][/tt]
[tab][red]The plural of anecdote is not data[/red]

Help us help you. Please read FAQ 181-2886 before posting.

 

[risby]

Ouch, such vitriol.

There's no vitriol on my part CC. I always have a laugh when I read your postings.

Cheers

==========================================

abjure hippopotomonstrosesquipedaliophobia

 

[CajunCenturion]

Yeah, I'll bet you do.

--------------
Good Luck
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read
FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein