Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!

Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!

Register Log in
  • Congratulations Chriss Miller on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Spoon Fulls?????

Status
Not open for further replies.
mscallisto

mscallisto

Technical User
Joined
Jun 14, 2001
Messages
2,990
Location
US
It has always bothered me when one says "three spoon fulls" in place of "three spoons full".

Others are Surgeon generals, hand fulls, brother-in-laws etc. Am I correct or wrong?
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
In the first case, spoonful is one word and only has one 'l', not two. The plural of spoonful is spoonfuls. You may have three spoons full of sugar, or you may have three spoonfuls of sugar.

Brothers-in-law is the proper plural but brother-in-law's is the proper possessive.

Further, I would ask "Am I correct or incorrect?", or "Am I right or wrong?", but I would not ask, "Am I correct or wrong?".

--------------
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
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

Much like "spoonful", "handful" is a single word, too, so the plural would be "handfuls". The word means "the amount a spoon/hand/etc. can hold". It behaves very similarly to other nouns of quantity (if I can call them that): "a dollop", "a drop", etc.; and it is just what it is - a noun.

As for "Surgeon general" and "brother-in-law", it's a different matter. They are separate words, and acoording to dictionary.com, plural would be "Surgeons general" and "brothers-in-law".

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
->the word is spelled "spoonful" and the plural is "spoonfuls".

The same is true of handful.

But you are right about "Surgeon generals" and "brother-in-laws". Those are correctly pluralized as "Surgeons General" and "brothers-in-law". But keep in mind that the possessive of these are "Surgeon general's" and "brother-in-law's"

[tt]_____
[blue]-John[/blue]
[/tt][red]Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur[/red]

Help us help you. Please read FAQ181-2886 before posting.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The words are "spoonful" and "handful," so "spoonfuls" and "handfuls" are correct.

I'd assume it's Surgeon Generals, but I'm probably wrong.

Brother in Laws, bothers me, though.

Biggest one that bothers me is "forums."

-------------------------
Just call me Captain Awesome.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I agree about "forums". I know it should be "fora". However, I have taken to using "forums", because it's universally understood, whereas "fora" is not. I think of it as technical jargon, similar to "prepend", mentioned in another thread.

Thomas D. Greer
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The reason that the plural of Surgeon General is Surgeons General, as is the case of brothers-in-law, is that when you have a hyponated noun consisting of a noun-adjective pair, the plural goes to the noun, but the possessive goes to the adjective.

In Surgeon General, Attorney General, Postmaster General, and so forth, 'general' acts as an adjective in the sense that he/she is the Surgeon/Attorney/Postmaster/Solicitor in the general sense, not in any specific sense, but general meaning over it all. It is not a rank in a military sense. It is an adjective, and the plural will go to the noun.

Three Surgeons General have used this office. It is the Surgeon General's office.

--------------
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
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
CajunCenturion said:
Three Surgeons General have used this office. It is the Surgeon General's office.
Click to expand...

Two Surgeons General use this office, would that make it the Surgeons General office, or the Surgeons General's office, or could it be the general office of the Surgeons General ... English ... not an easy language

I used two here in case the successor meets their predecessor at a time of handover, if there's a precedent where this couldn't happen in American, or other administrations, I for one am blissfully unaware of it ...
;-)

Spend an hour a week on CPAN, helps cure all known programming ailments ;-)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

grande:Biggest one that bothers me is "forums."

This one doesn't bother me at all. In fact, even though most dictionaries show both as correct, if asked, I would vote for "forums" as the correct one. English has borrowed many words from around the world, and treated them by the local law - English grammar rules. So why a handful of Latin words got to get a special treatment? When a word from borrowed becomes truly appropriated by the language, it gets the common treatment, and fits seamlessly in the fabric of the language.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I'm with Stella. I usually opt for 'forums'. And regardless of preference, I don't see how you can claim that 'forums' is wrong (unlike Surgeon Generals).

'Forums' vs. 'Fora' was tackled a while back.

You can read the arguments here: thread1256-887124

An interesting bit from that conversation:
sleipnir214 said:
An article at YourDictionary.com, titled "How Many Words are in English?" reads in part[
It is true that English borrows recklessly from virtually every language on earth. In fact, "borrow" may be too weak in speaking of English; we should say that English aggressively mugs other languages for their lexical treasure
Click to expand...

This can make the construction of plurals interesting.

Take octopus, which is pluralized in English as either octopi (in deference to the fact the word entered English from New Latin) or octopuses (using the English-standard pluralization rule).

However, octopus is actually a New Latin import word from Greek. The word is constructed of a pair of Greek words, okto (eight) plus pous (foot). And pous in Greek takes the plural poda. So if you use the "origin language" pluralization rule, the plural of octopus should be octopoda. Which in a way it is -- the Order which contains all octopods and devilfish is called "Octopoda".
Click to expand...

PS - Why do I remember this crap? If only I could have had this kind of retention in History class....

[tt]_____
[blue]-John[/blue]
[/tt][red]Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur[/red]

Help us help you. Please read FAQ181-2886 before posting.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
So why a handful of Latin words got to get a special treatment? When a word from borrowed becomes truly appropriated by the language, it gets the common treatment, and fits seamlessly in the fabric of the language.
Click to expand...
It's not just Latin-based words that get special treatment -- English words get special treatment, too. Child , goose and deer are all words that have been a part of the language since Old English and that have exotic pluralization rules.

I figure a few additional rules will not hurt anyone and add some spice to our speech. Whether you say octopoda, octopi or octopuses is really all a matter of context, preference, and the ability to transmit meaning.



Want the best answers? Ask the best questions!

TANSTAAFL!!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

anotherhiggins,

Likewise, I remeber them, too - and didn't have "this kind of retention in History class".

There is another one, thread1256-976105. I clearly remembered that I already posted on the word borrowing and English vs. borrowed rules.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I vote, naturally, for "for rums." As opposed to "fora."

"Fora" sounds like a guy who can't count to five. "For Rums" sounds like a guy buying a round for the house - my kinda guy.

Tim


[blue]______________________________________________________________
I love logging onto Tek-Tips. It's always so exciting to see what the hell I
said yesterday. [/blue]
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Two Surgeons General use this office, would that make it the Surgeons General office, or the Surgeons General's office
Click to expand...

Wouldn't it be Surgeons Generals' (with the apostraphe after the 's')?

--Dave


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
O Time, Strength, Cash, and Patience! [infinity]
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I don't think so LookingForInfo, because the office belongs to only one of them, the one currently serving in that capacity.

--------------
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
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I was working under Paul's original premise that "Two Surgeons General use this office" (assumption: simultaneously). I suppose I would have to concede, however, that, even if that were true, at any point in time, one of them is NOT a Surgeon General, but rather a Surgeon General-elect (or whatever an appointed position is called where the appointee hasn't yet assumed the position).

'just trying to muddy things up a bit!

--Dave


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
O Time, Strength, Cash, and Patience! [infinity]
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
So if there were a single office that was shared by the Attorneys General of several different states, that would be the Attorneys General's office.

[tt]_____
[blue]-John[/blue]
[/tt][red]Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur[/red]

Help us help you. Please read FAQ181-2886 before posting.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
SilentAiche,
I just burst into laugh imaginig 'Fora' as a boy who can't count to 5. Sometimes you are too funny!

Wait...is it 'sometimes' or 'some time'?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

hairlessupportmonkey
  • Locked
  • Question Question
Your favourate Spoonerisms?
2
Replies
30
Views
1K
gbaughma
gbaughma
ESquared
  • Locked
  • Question Question
More Spoonerisms
Replies
6
Views
291
ESquared
ESquared
jdunderhill
  • Locked
  • Question Question
Spoonerisms!
2
Replies
32
Views
1K
dreibelbis
dreibelbis
Dimandja
  • Locked
  • Question Question
Spaces, Fullstops, Etcetera
2
Replies
35
Views
795
SilentAiche
SilentAiche

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top