On Wed, Sep 06, 2006 at 09:19:30AM -0700, Lan Barnes wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 09:39:44PM -0500, Todd Walton wrote:
> > On 9/5/06, Lan Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Barnes's book
> > > Barnes' book
> > >
> > >Equally correct.
> >
> > No they're not.
> >
> > -todd
> >
>
> Yes, they are.
>
> <that was easy>
>
Of course, after I posted this, Todd took the cheap shot of
ameliorating his statement. I hate you, Todd! :-P
My source is the same ... teachers long dead. I also worked in the field
as a copy editor for a magazine ... again, long ago.
One thing I learned is that practices change, frequently for the better.
An example would be the CD's CDs discussion. The second form is clear
without the apostrophe, and has the added advantage that the first form
can then be unambiguously the possessive.
The one sin that can't be waved away is inconsistency in the same piece
of writing. I have a hell of a time keeping data base and database from
being in the same email :-(
--
Lan Barnes
Linux Guy, SCM Specialist
Tcl/Tk Enthusiast
To conceive extravagant pretensions from success in war is to forget how
hollow is the confidence by which you are elated. For if many
ill-conceived plans have succeeded through the still greater fatuity of
an opponent, many more, apparently well laid, have on the contrary ended
in disgrace.
- Thucydides
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
