Apostrophe crimes

[LGTrotter]

1. It is in the nature of those who are not young to worry about and to decry the abilities of those who are. This has gone on for millennia.

+1
And I think we all should have more faith in the younger generation. Remember, they will pay our pension. So we should have a little faith in them.

I also (my version of +1). Young people seem to be wiser, politer, more relaxed, more thoughtful about themselves and understanding of others than my generation ever were. And I don't care if they don't pay our pensions. People in their twenties who worry about pensions really need to get out more, or at least go to more disreputable places.

[djewesbury]

I have faith. But I also find myself screaming 'HOW?' on a regular basis.

[djewesbury]

Also; they don't need to worry about it. We do.

[AW77]

All this talk about the younger generation and their faults made me thoughtful. I guess we're all not young anymore. Otherwise we wouldn't drink port (this is simply not a drink for young people: too old-fashioned for them and also pricey given young people's financial means). Perhaps this talk about how faulty young people are is another sign that we're getting older.

[jdaw1]

Well the Oxford clue has me completely flummoxed. So you'd better open the box.

2. I suspect your population sample is small, biased and unrepresentative of the young population as a whole. Whilst the sample can be analyzed the conclusions are most likely applicable only to the sample itself (or to a wider group of individuals who share the attributes of those in the sample).

Heavens above. Today’s academics: they can quote Greek literature until the cows come home, but still can’t cross Snow’s divide.

Yes, the sample is small. All samples are smaller than the population. Hence ‘sample’. And sample “conclusions are” definitely “applicable” “to the sample itself”. Sure, by definition. But they are also applicable — wait for it — “to a wider group of individuals who share the attributes of those in the sample”. Behold a tautology!

As they say in the pension industry, “Vita longa, ars brevis”.

[djewesbury]

Oh that. Yeah well I presumed that was obvious. I thought that the answer would be much further across the Divide and into the Other Continent.
Now, would you like a short treatise on the history of the cows coming home in the ancient literature of Britain and Ireland?

[LGTrotter]

Oh that. Yeah well I presumed that was obvious. I thought that the answer would be much further across the Divide and into the Other Continent.
Now, would you like a short treatise on the history of the cows coming home in the ancient literature of Britain and Ireland?

Make mine a long treatise on...etc.

[djewesbury]

Julian - perhaps for the non-British participants in this thread you would add a link to the article on the Two Cultures in your previous post?

[Glenn E.]

Well the Oxford clue has me completely flummoxed. So you'd better open the box.

2. I suspect your population sample is small, biased and unrepresentative of the young population as a whole. Whilst the sample can be analyzed the conclusions are most likely applicable only to the sample itself (or to a wider group of individuals who share the attributes of those in the sample).

Heavens above. Today’s academics: they can quote Greek literature until the cows come home, but still can’t cross Snow’s divide.

Yes, the sample is small. All samples are smaller than the population. Hence ‘sample’. And sample “conclusions are” definitely “applicable” “to the sample itself”. Sure, by definition. But they are also applicable — wait for it — “to a wider group of individuals who share the attributes of those in the sample”. Behold a tautology!

As they say in the pension industry, “Vita longa, ars brevis”.

The box to which I referred is much smaller than the on Julian has opened.

There's an Oxford comma missing.

[djewesbury]

Oh! Small, biased, and unrepresentative. Yes. Silly me. But I would tend to avoid use of an Oxford comma unless the sentence is genuinely ambiguous without it.

[djewesbury]

Daniel, don't be so grumpy. It's no good to get worked up over something you cannot change anyway.

We can all change everything André, but in order to do so we have to be able to see it clearly in the first place. :triumphant optimist:

Owen I thought you might have backed me up on this one. Oh well. All fatalists then.

[jdaw1]

There's an Oxford comma missing.

For my taste an Oxford comma is optional. Use if required by the rhythm of the sentence, or pace djewesbury, for disambiguation. Or if liked by the author.

[DRT]

Thank you to all who have commented on my question in the past 24 hours. Very (un)helpful.

[djewesbury]

Lead and we follow.

[LGTrotter]

Thank you to all who have commented on my question in the past 24 hours. Very (un)helpful.

It looked like a trap to me.

There's an Oxford comma missing.

For my taste an Oxford comma is optional. Use if required by the rhythm of the sentence, or pace djewesbury, for disambiguation. Or if liked by the author.

The problem being that it doesn't always disambiguate. And it's decidedly American. Pace Britannicus only, on this occasion.

[djewesbury]

Quite. So only use it when it really is necessary and really does the job.

[PopulusTremula]

On a positive or practical note, at least i chose the right thread for my plethora of grammatical and logical errors. Must have saved people time when quoting.

[LGTrotter]

Quite. So only use it when it really is necessary and really does the job.

Even then, don't use it. It looks wrong.

[Glenn E.]

Quite. So only use it when it really is necessary and really does the job.

Even then, don't use it. It looks wrong.

Absolutely correct. It looks wrong when you don't use it.

[DRT]

Thank you to all who have commented on my question in the past 24 hours. Very (un)helpful.

It looked like a trap to me.

It was a cry for help.

[djewesbury]

Quite. So only use it when it really is necessary and really does the job.

Even then, don't use it. It looks wrong.

Absolutely correct. It looks wrong when you don't use it.

And so it began all over again…

[LGTrotter]

Today’s academics: they can quote Greek literature until the cows come home, but still can’t cross Snow’s divide.

How very unusual. One of Snow's lot dividing the world into binary opposites, a crime of understanding compounded by falling into the trap of failing to understand that the Greeks told all the stories there are to tell.

[djewesbury]

Lucklily these things keep there value

[DRT]

Lucklily these things keep there value

Oh so it's one of those nights, is it? Simple typing mistakes being named as crimes!

I claim immunity on the grounds that typing isn't my first language.

[djewesbury]

There value?

[djewesbury]

I wasn't even citing you for 'lucklily' but if you'd like it taken into account…

[DRT]

Oops! It's a fare cop.


Please don't do it to yourself.

[jdaw1]

British English: ‘amenable to being fiddled’ = fiddlable or fiddleable?

[PhilW]

British English: ‘amenable to being fiddled’ = fiddlable or fiddleable?

With the 'e'.

[djewesbury]

Without the 'e'.

[jdaw1]

Without the 'e'.

Please cite your sources.

[djewesbury]

Why do I have to cite my sources when Phil didn't, sir?

[jdaw1]

Why do I have to cite my sources when Phil didn't, sir?

Because you are often instructing others to cite sources. And because Phil’s answer agreed with my intuition.

[djewesbury]

If one of my students used the word, I would point out that however you spell it, it is extremely ugly and not, according to the OED, a recognised word. I would probably use the QuickMark button telling them to REPHRASE.
If your mind is already veering towards Phil's conclusion then please proceed. I would rather not have to cite sources from my phone right now as it is just too fiddly (and my phone is not so fiddlable). I think the 'e' is clearly redundant and has no place; and since it's a made-up word, there really is no 'correct' way to spell it, merely less ugly ones.

[Glenn E.]

British English: ‘amenable to being fiddled’ = fiddlable or fiddleable?

Depends on how you pronounce it.

Fid-la-bull?

Fiddle-a-bull?

That will determine the answer.

[djewesbury]

I suggest that this is an improper use of the Court of Apostrophes' time. Should there be a new thread entitled 'JDAW's literate importuning'?

[jdaw1]

If one of my students used the word, I would point out that however you spell it, it is extremely ugly and not, according to the OED, a recognised word.

Hmm: please suggest alternatives.

[djewesbury]

Supply context. Do you mean fiddled as in manipulated - manipulable - or maybe in the sense of fine-tuned? Or some other?

[PhilW]

If one of my students used the word, I would point out that however you spell it, it is extremely ugly and not, according to the OED, a recognised word.

Hmm: please suggest alternatives.

I thought through a list of similar words before posting, such as
- manageable (managable not recognised by british spell checkers)
- likeable (likable only used by Americans)
I think there were others, and I could think of no counter-example, hence my choice. Daniel, you're clearly veering toward the American; Glenn...
The clear alternative to any sentence using "fiddleable" would be to replace with "able to be fiddled"?

[LGTrotter]

Daniel, you're clearly veering toward the American;

Oh Phil, that's a bit of low blow.

[Andy Velebil]

http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.p ... 162#p88162

A travesty has beset our revered Julian, or should I say Juiian

[djewesbury]

http://www.theportforum.com/viewtopic.p ... 162#p88162

A travesty has beset our revered Julian, or should I say Juiian

You turned yourself in, expecting a fairer trial. I like it. Derek should take note.
Sorry, now I understand. I don't think Julian's sign says Juiian. I think the light is just reflected on the 'l'; or the printer ink has been slightly erased.

[PhilW]

I'd like to report my mate Jewesbury for the crime of appearing to be American twice in one week. I could refer to his as t'Jewesbury in my best northern accent if it would help acceptance in this thread.

[djewesbury]

I'd like to report my mate Jewesbury for the crime of appearing to be American twice in one week. I could refer to his as t'Jewesbury in my best northern accent if it would help acceptance in this thread.

Let me see, how to mount my defence.
Your honours, lords on the bench, I think he's lost it.
(And surely "t'Jewesbury" is a crime against Yorkshire, as it's spoke, like?)

[LGTrotter]

I'd like to report my mate Jewesbury for the crime of appearing to be American twice in one week. I could refer to his as t'Jewesbury in my best northern accent if it would help acceptance in this thread.

Let me see, how to mount my defence.
Your honours, lords on the bench, I think he's lost it.
(And surely "t'Jewesbury" is a crime against Yorkshire, as it's spoke, like?)

Yeah get him Phil, I'm ironing my black cap as we speak. Too long has the punctuation of our fair forum groaned under the yoke of this new Robespierre. Prepare the tumbrels!

[djewesbury]

You too, turning against me? Et tu, Lemuel?

[jdaw1]

the yoke of this new Robespierre. Prepare the tumbrels!

Err, long live the old Robespierre?

[djewesbury]

One of my favourites has just made an appearance:

I would have expected (but do not know) the IVDP to know and maintain such information; whether they publish it publically I have no idea, but might be worth a trawl through their website, or an enquiry.

Even without the spelling error, to publish publicly surely represents a tautology of sorts when referring to a government agency: the act of publishing includes the concept of making public.

[jdaw1]

If data is released only to those paying a subscription, could that be a private publication?

[LGTrotter]

Hang on, wasn't Daniel deposed in a bloody coup yesterday? Now here he is expanding his remit into possible examples of tautology. Has the world gone mad?