On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 18:30:23 -0400, Tony Harminc wrote:

>On 18 September 2012 16:52, John Gilmore wrote:
>> I don't find the argument that the terminal 's' in 'PoOps' represents
>> the plural terminus of 'Principles' at all persuasive.  It seems to me
>> to be a desperate expedient to justify the indefensible.
>
>I find it entirely persuasive. I believe it's a quite ordinary
>metathesis, like many others in English and indeed many languages.
>While English has little experience with forming - let alone
>pluralising - words as acronyms or as severe condensations, it has
>long experience with words like teaspoonful, which has an unargued
>plural of teaspoonfuls, rather than teaspoonsful (or teaspoonsfull).
>Of course we have phrases like Governors General, but once we've
>collapsed our original into a single pronounceable word, my ear says
>the 's' both must be preserved, and must go at the end.
> 
It's Friday.  We can revisit the discussion of the "singular of MIPS".
Or we can go get a beer.

-- gil

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to