what about my suggestion morbius
― s1ocki, Friday, 19 October 2007 15:19 (sixteen years ago) link
I have no power over what the Krell -- I mean, my editor -- will decide. I've added an "s" query and moved on.
― Dr Morbius, Friday, 19 October 2007 15:21 (sixteen years ago) link
I still think the original sentence with "treatments" instead of "treatment" doesn't read unclearly, btw, Morb.
― Will M., Friday, 19 October 2007 15:23 (sixteen years ago) link
xpost yay :)
<i>Zelda, that sentence is weird either way.</i>
Yeah, I guess you're right!
― Zelda Zonk, Friday, 19 October 2007 15:24 (sixteen years ago) link
You really have to query something as small as that? God, I'd go nuts.
― quincie, Friday, 19 October 2007 15:25 (sixteen years ago) link
I don't have to; I simply don't want to decide.
― Dr Morbius, Friday, 19 October 2007 15:27 (sixteen years ago) link
Morbius the Scrivener
― jaymc, Friday, 19 October 2007 15:34 (sixteen years ago) link
hahaha
― Tracer Hand, Friday, 19 October 2007 15:41 (sixteen years ago) link
full stops at the end of bullet-pointed sentences, yay or nay?
― Upt0eleven, Monday, 22 October 2007 11:49 (sixteen years ago) link
I say nay, unless you have more than one sentence per bullet point.
― Madchen, Monday, 22 October 2007 11:51 (sixteen years ago) link
(I don't know why, other than it feels somehow right so somebody else will have to give you a proper answer).
― Madchen, Monday, 22 October 2007 11:52 (sixteen years ago) link
Tends to depend on style guide/consistency, with yes/no/only-last-one all possible.
― Eyeball Kicks, Monday, 22 October 2007 11:57 (sixteen years ago) link
I think I would punctuate it as I would a sentence if I'd chosen to break up the thing with commas instead of bullet points, so if you have three partial ends to a sentence it could end:
+ like this, or + like that, or + like something else entirely.
― ailsa, Monday, 22 October 2007 12:00 (sixteen years ago) link
This is mostly because I like things to look nice and logical, not because I know lots about the "right" way of doing things.
― ailsa, Monday, 22 October 2007 12:01 (sixteen years ago) link
I hate it when people end them with 'or', 'and' or (worst of all) semicolons. We are sophisticated readers who understand how lists work.
― Eyeball Kicks, Monday, 22 October 2007 12:03 (sixteen years ago) link
It makes me think of leaflets about social security benefits.
i have thusly been fullstopping because i just think a full sentence should be fully punctuated but most places seem not to. i can't handle the conflict.
― Upt0eleven, Monday, 22 October 2007 12:09 (sixteen years ago) link
dos and don'ts do's and don'ts do's and don't's
?
― Zelda Zonk, Monday, 22 October 2007 12:17 (sixteen years ago) link
First one. Though I'm pretty sure the second one is acceptable as well.
― ailsa, Monday, 22 October 2007 12:19 (sixteen years ago) link
I agree, but "dos" still somehow looks a bit wrong...
― Zelda Zonk, Monday, 22 October 2007 12:20 (sixteen years ago) link
I remember asking somewhere else about the expression fair dos/fair does/fair do's and being told the former and latter were both acceptable as a pluralisation of do. Don't like it much though.
― ailsa, Monday, 22 October 2007 12:21 (sixteen years ago) link
ooh can you do former/latter with a triple option? is the 2nd a... middler?
― r|t|c, Monday, 22 October 2007 14:21 (sixteen years ago) link
Probably not, heh, I am keeping this thread on its toes and reminding you all that I am just an amateur pedant so my advice is not to be taken seriously.
― ailsa, Monday, 22 October 2007 14:23 (sixteen years ago) link
google tells me it shouldn't be used formally, but is used conversationally as it still conveys what is meant fairly clearly.
― ailsa, Monday, 22 October 2007 14:28 (sixteen years ago) link
Re the plural of BBS:
An article just landed on my desk that uses the abbreviation SNS (social networking site) and its plural SNSs. I'm going to query it.
― jaymc, Monday, 22 October 2007 17:23 (sixteen years ago) link
Do's appears in many dictionaries as an independent word, because dos and don'ts may look suspiciously like Spanglish for "two and don'ts."
Thus: do's and don'ts
(You can trust me, because I got totally burned on trying to "correct" that a couple years back.)
― nabisco, Monday, 22 October 2007 17:27 (sixteen years ago) link
sort of a follow-up on my question about outsourcing copyediting.
― tipsy mothra, Monday, 22 October 2007 17:40 (sixteen years ago) link
I thought it was "do's and don't's"? Looks kind of retarded, sure.
― Laurel, Monday, 22 October 2007 17:45 (sixteen years ago) link
it would never, ever, ever be "do's and don't's". ever. in any possible universe.
― grimly fiendish, Monday, 22 October 2007 17:56 (sixteen years ago) link
I thought whatsherface from the shoots and leaves book had said it was? But my copy is at home. Anyway, I was checking b/c we publish a book by that title and it gets done all different ways in the systems.
― Laurel, Monday, 22 October 2007 17:57 (sixteen years ago) link
I thought whatsherface from the shoots and leaves book had said it was?
if she did (and i doubt it), she's an even bigger cock-end than i think she is.
― grimly fiendish, Monday, 22 October 2007 17:58 (sixteen years ago) link
I think the apostrophe in do's is a special case, for clarity/disambiguation -- there is no reason to do the same for don'ts, which perfectly clear in its natural no-apostrophe plural.
― nabisco, Monday, 22 October 2007 18:00 (sixteen years ago) link
What about that universe of yours where 2+2 != 4?
― stet, Monday, 22 October 2007 18:02 (sixteen years ago) link
hah, i was discussing that with F on saturday, believe it or not.
but no, not even in that one.
― grimly fiendish, Monday, 22 October 2007 18:03 (sixteen years ago) link
Dunkin Don't's
― nabisco, Monday, 22 October 2007 18:08 (sixteen years ago) link
DOS is definitely a don't these days. C:/suck
― Abbott, Monday, 22 October 2007 18:10 (sixteen years ago) link
dos and windon'ts ... no, that doesn't work. forget i said it.
― grimly fiendish, Monday, 22 October 2007 18:11 (sixteen years ago) link
How about does and doesn'ts?
― Alba, Monday, 22 October 2007 18:12 (sixteen years ago) link
and dozy dotes and little lamsy divey
― tipsy mothra, Monday, 22 October 2007 18:17 (sixteen years ago) link
Do-si-dos.
― jaymc, Monday, 22 October 2007 18:19 (sixteen years ago) link
eyes to the right noses to the left
― stet, Monday, 22 October 2007 18:19 (sixteen years ago) link
what do you like better:
on-site or onsite
like, onsite repair vs on-site repair
― rrrobyn, Thursday, 25 October 2007 15:35 (sixteen years ago) link
both are "correct"
― rrrobyn, Thursday, 25 October 2007 15:36 (sixteen years ago) link
On-site.
― Eyeball Kicks, Thursday, 25 October 2007 15:39 (sixteen years ago) link
Yeah, I would hyphenate that, too. It's not quite at the level of "online."
― jaymc, Thursday, 25 October 2007 15:41 (sixteen years ago) link
yeah that was my reasoning too - also it has more impact i find cool thanks guys
― rrrobyn, Thursday, 25 October 2007 15:46 (sixteen years ago) link
The official spelling is Daylight Saving Time, not Daylight SavingS Time.
Saving is used here as a verbal adjective (a participle). It modifies time and tells us more about its nature; namely, that it is characterized by the activity of saving daylight. It is a saving daylight kind of time. Because of this, it would be more accurate to refer to DST as daylight-saving time. Similar examples would be a mind-expanding book or a man-eating tiger. Saving is used in the same way as saving a ball game, rather than as a savings account.
http://webexhibits.org/daylightsaving/b.html
― Tracer Hand, Sunday, 28 October 2007 23:41 (sixteen years ago) link
has the word "waiter" lost its gender? y'know, like "actor" supposedly has now come to encompass the male and the female.
i'm writing in the singular so can't use the term "waiting staff" and would rather not write "waiter/waitress".
chars
― Upt0eleven, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 10:30 (sixteen years ago) link
no it still has a gender
waitron
server
order-jockey
― Tracer Hand, Wednesday, 31 October 2007 11:03 (sixteen years ago) link