RE: Corpora: Apostrophes

From: Mike O'Connell (Michael.Oconnell@Colorado.EDU)
Date: Wed Dec 19 2001 - 05:20:17 MET

  • Next message: Mike O'Connell: "Re: Corpora: Apostrophes"

    Mr. Bader,
       Noting your address @firespout.com, I feel that perhaps your remarks
    should be taken with a cup of water as well.
       Honestly & earnestly, I do think it's worth noting that flames are as
    relative as both blessings & curses, depending on where they originate and
    where they end up.
       I guess I take apostrophes (apart from the one in my name which the
    American Social Security Dep't took away a few years back) entirely for
    granted.
       In sum, while I have nothing of merit to contribute to the actual
    discussion, I found the flame aspect noteworthy. There aren't many such
    indulgences on the corpora list.

    Cheers,
      M. O`Connell

    On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Christopher Bader wrote:

    > I was pained to see Alex Fang's flame of Simon Smith's thoughtful post.
    >
    > Alex should read up on language vs. orthography, prescription vs.
    > description,
    > and other concepts that are covered in elementary linguistics courses,
    > before
    > issuing more flames.
    >
    > Christopher Bader
    >
    >
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Alex Chengyu Fang
    > Sent: Tue 12/18/2001 9:10 AM
    > To: Simon G. J. Smith; corpora@hd.uib.no
    > Cc:
    > Subject: Re: Corpora: Apostrophes
    >
    >
    >
    > I'm sorry, Simon, but I think you've said a few
    > incorrect and confusing things:
    >
    > > I suppose when I referred to the status of 1L and 2L
    > > English I was thinking more of the language itself
    > > than its orthographical representation, but it
    >
    > Can you clarify on this please?
    >
    > > certainly is interesting that native writers cannot
    > > agree on apostrophe/letter "s" usage. I went to a
    >
    > There is indeed some agreement on the use of
    > apostrophes.
    >
    > > called "Thomas' Train" (of tank engine fame). If I
    > > were guided by the pronunciation, I would write
    > > "Lord Williams' School" and "Thomas's train"; so
    > > presumably pronunciation has nothing to do with it,
    > > and the alternatives are in arbitrary free
    > > variation.
    >
    > Pronunciation has a lot to do with it. They both
    > should have a "s's" pronunciation. The correct
    > treatment of "Williams's" is muffled because of the
    > clumsy "s's" cluster when followed by "school".
    >
    > > seems that the correct use of the apostrophe, in
    > > British English at least, is not as cut and dried as
    > > one might suppose, so perhaps it is not surprising
    > > that people do sometimes make mistakes. We manage
    >
    > So you do think they are mistakes?
    >
    > > quite satisfactorily without the apostrophe in
    > > speech, since it serves no disambiguating function;
    > > I expect eventually it will simply slip out of use.
    >
    > It does serve some disambiguating function:
    > "Williams's" is singular and "Williams'" plural.
    >
    > > 's tend to use that construction; in some such cases
    > > I think a native speaker would prefer a noun
    > > compound. Annoyingly, though, I can't think of a
    > > convincing example.
    >
    > "Learner dictionary" would be a good example, for both
    > English and Chinese.
    >
    >
    > Regards,
    >
    > Alex
    >
    >
    > __________________________________________________
    > Do You Yahoo!?
    > Everything you'll ever need on one web page
    > from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
    > http://uk.my.yahoo.com <http://uk.my.yahoo.com>
    >
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Dec 19 2001 - 05:23:29 MET