ATTN: Copyeditors and Grammar Fiends

Argentine or Argentinian? I thought argentine was only for silvery things.

spelling = identification
grammar = communication

chew on that a bit.

[chews, isn't sure, swallows politely anyway]

Argentine or Argentinian? I thought argentine was only for silvery things

can't remember, but a good dictionary (ODWEs?) will help you out on the distinction i'm missing. i think you're right, but i might be wrong :)

My OD has neither! But I will search in others. It has no countries or country-related adjectives, in fact. And doesn't even have argentine as in silvery.

*throws 2-yr-old OD in bin*

argentine = silvery
Argentine = relating to Argentina (adjective); a citizen of Argentina (noun)
Argentinian = relating to Argentina (adjective); a citizen of Argentina (noun)
Argie (offensive) = relating to Argentina (adjective); a citizen of Argentina (noun)

I don't know if there are distinctions such as those between Arab, Arabic and Arabian.

I've always used Argentine and Argentinian interchangeably. Based on the frequency of usage within our online database here, it appears we prefer "Argentine" to refer to someone or something from Argentina.

Argentine = relating to Argentina (adjective); a citizen of Argentina (noun)
Argentinian = relating to Argentina (adjective); a citizen of Argentina (noun)

hmm. i'm sure i've always perceived a difference between the two usages -- ie "Argentine" is the adjective and "Argentinian" the noun, or the other way round -- but that could be a house-style thing.

unlikely, given the state of the existing style book in our, er, "house". but hey. if i had a copy of ODWEs to hand, i'd check. but i don't. so i can't. so hey.

xpost

I like the adjective "Argentine" just on a gut level, mostly because I feel like we have a lazy English-speaking habit of always trying to force everything to fit the "_____ian" format. (To which we've recently added a lazy habit of always trying to force things to fit the "____i" format!)

Thank you all.

(I think my habit has been to say Argentinian for a person and Argentine for a thing....no logic to that whatsoever.)

(To which we've recently added a lazy habit of always trying to force things to fit the "____i" format!)

Yeah, this is most apparent with people who've heard "Iraqi" and "Pakistani" deciding that someone from Afghanistan is an "Afghani" rather than an "Afghan."

But but but afghans are blankets, and I like the sound of Afghani better.

And such variations make it even more daft that my dictionary doesn't bother to tell me what is correct. Rubbish. Anyway.

To be fair, Webster's lists both.

Euro: capped or not?

("We expect a gradual appreciation of the US dollar vs. the euro...")

As a unit of currency, it's lowercased.

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=FSq&q=%22Which+community-oriented+goals+should+I+share%3F%22&btnG=Search&meta=

hey i was wondering if there is something wrong with the grammar of this sentence ? seems like a question that ought to be more common than that , lol

gramatically it's reasonable.

semantically, though ...

"Just minutes of exercise helps older women"

No problem, right?

Yeah, I think in that case it refers to a singular block of time. That usage is common and pluralizing the verb sounds v. awkward.

Personally, I'd add 'a few' and make it 'can help'.

Which one?

1. Vegetable oil-based inks
2. Vegetable oil based inks
3. Vegetable-oil based inks
4. Vegetable-oil-based inks

first one, definitely.

Well, I don't like doing it that way. Often you can get away with making this form less ugly by doing 4. But not here, I think. I'm for 2.

Anyway, why are you so sure? I sometimes see people write things like "red wine-based sauce", which is crazy as well as ugly.

hang on, why did you ask then? only one of those is correct and that's the first one.

deconstruct it thus: vegetable oil is a type of oil; if the inks had their basis in oil, they'd be oil-based inks; so if they're based on vegetable oil, they're vegetable oil-based inks, end of story. you need the hyphen.

xpost ugly or no, red wine-based sauce is correct also!

No it's not! "Red wine-based sauce" could easily mean a sauce made using white wine and... beetroot!

This doesn't happen with "vegetable oil based inks" because "vegetable" isn't usually an adjective, so your version can only be understood in one way -- but I dislike the ugly inconsistency nonetheless.

Hmm, I take it back actually. A sauce made with white wine and beetroot would be a "red, wine-based sauce". I'm wrong.

No it's not! "Red wine-based sauce" could easily mean a sauce made using white wine and... beetroot!

it could, but it'd take quite a dunderheaded and unnecessary leap of logic to come to that wholly non-obvious conclusion. However, the insertion of a comma ("red, wine-based sauce") would make the ambiguity of which you speak, more overt - if, say, your sauce were based on white wine and rose but is only red on account of lots of tomatoes therein, or something.

haha xpost!

yes i'm with charlieno4, although i agree it's ugly

Personally, I would go with #4, although a case could be made for #1, since there isn't likely to be much confusion.

In the case of the sauce made of red wine, though, I would argue strenuously for "red-wine-based sauce," since "red sauce that happens to be wine-based" makes a whole lot more sense (and thus is likely to be read by some as such) than ""vegetable ink that happens to be oil-based."

#2 and #3 shouldn't be used, as "-based" should always be hyphenated.

#4

When I'm done with the TV show I'd really like to try and do more movies so I guess that's when I'll really see how competitive it is.

My problem with this is the "try and" construction. I usually change it to "try to" but am I being too harsh? He's not trying and doing more movies, he's trying to do more movies, right?

I Just think "try and" is a spoken-only construction that oughtn't be written down. Thoughts?

Definitely. "Try and" makes no sense - what are you going to try, and why are you doing this other thing at the same time?

yes, agreed. "try and" comes across my desk more than i'd expect it to. i always change it.

DUDES
"vegetable oil--based inks"
with an N dash
Chicago style
that's what it's there for

Hmmm, I only really use the en-dash in a case like this when hyphenating all three words makes it confusing as to which words go together.

For instance,

"A screwdriver is a vodka-orange-juice concoction."

Since it's not clear whether it's "vodka and orange juice" or "vodka, orange, and juice" or some drink called "vodka orange" mixed with juice, it'd make better sense to say "vodka--orange-juice" (where the double hyphen represents an en-dash).

erk! i have never seen the n-dash used that way

DUDES
"vegetable oil--based inks"
with an N dash
Chicago style
that's what it's there for

This is the in the UK, and I'd never use -- I've never seen -- an N-dash used in that way.

For what it's worth, the text originally had version 1, which I immediately marked to be changed to 4. Then I doubted myself, posted to this thread, found another instance of version 4 and steted my change. (Also, the first example was in whatever-you-call-the-bit-on-page-3-of-a-magazine-with-all-the-small-print, which never changes, so version 1 had been happily existing there for several issues before I came along to meddle with it).

And I'd use "vodka and orange-juice concoction" (hyphen in "orange juice" even though it doesn't normally need one).

This is the in the UK, and I'd never use -- I've never seen -- an N-dash used in that way.

I would never use a sentence used in this way either.

"The en dash is used in place of a hyphen in a compound adjective when one of its elements is an open compound or when two or more of its elements are open compounds or hyphenated compounds (see 7.83)."

the post--World War II years

I am skeptical of those who say they've never seen en dashes used this way, since it is sensible Chicago style, and it used by many major publications and in many common texts.

I've never used Chicago style. The style guide at my current job recommends the en-dash in compound nouns, at least one element of which is a group of words (such as "a New York--Seattle flight"), and also in compound adjectives of similar construction (such as "German--Scots-Irish ancestry"). It's not very clear on adjective-participle constructions like "red wine-based sauce."

Sure, J, but I'm saying I KNOW you've read stuff like the New York Review of Books, the Village Voice, or Slate, three out of a whole bunch of publications that use en dashes that way (IIRC).

oh, that chicago-style thing is joyous. i'd forgotten all about it, and my incredibly short-lived attempt to introduce it into scottish journalism. absolutely wonderful. i envy you, nabisco, being able to use it.

given that it's not a convention with which UK readers would be familiar, however, the correct answer is #4, and i'll fight anyone who disagrees. to the death.

there's a subeditors' group on facebook now. joy.

looks like somebody around here's using en dashes....

chicago style

Actually, I am UNABLE in my work capacity to use those disambiguating en dashes, which kinda saddens me.

Apparently there are now books on typography that advocate throwing out the em dash entirely, and using spaced-out ens for dashes. Which makes me want to barf, and which I suspect is subtly influenced by the fact that word turns a spaced-out "--" into an en.

word = microsoft Word

Nabisco, I feel like maybe I've mentioned this to you before, but can you do something-- talk to Scott or whatever-- about Pitchfork's ghastly habit of using double hyphens as in this sentence, with only one space instead of two? I mean, I'm OK with substituting double hyphens for em-dashes when it comes to web journalism, but the single space really drives me nuts. At least they seem to be consistent about it.

Check out this masterpiece of headline subbing (click thru for story)
)
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=337901&cc=5739