Where is the random wrong punctuation coming from?

[slidertogrid]

I recently posted a thread about some TVs I found. The title I put was "TVs" which as I understand it is the plural of TV. The title has now gone a little random the first one has changed to TV's which to me means something belonging to a TV? Then it reverts to TVs then even more strange further down it changes to TV;s?
This makes me look as if I cannot punctuate correctly... I admit I may be a little sensitive about this but because of a terrible edjukation I have to watch my speeling and punctuation! Is this a forum glitch?
https://www.bing.com/search?q=plural...fc426b9444a66e
Rich

[Station X]

All occurrences of TV's and TV;s in your thread have been changed to TVs.

There is scope for confusion with plurals of abbreviations. TVs could be read as Tee Vee Ess.

Similar problems can arise when dealing with valve types, particularly as some members don't capitalise them. So is it EL84's or EL84s? The latter could indicate a sub type in the same way as 6K7G or 6K7GT.

[slidertogrid]

Many thanks for putting it right and for the explanation. I still don't know how it ended up like it was though? I am very careful when I post to get it right , well as right as I can.. I am aware how easy it is to cause confusion and for a posting to look a mess if it isn't checked.

Rich.

[RogerEvans]

Shouldn't the title of this thread be 'from where is the random wrong punctuation coming?' Something to do with not ending a sentence with a preposition. Up with which I will not put!

Roger

English is an evolving non proscribed language, some of the new stuff I find a tad annoying. That doesn’t stop me enjoying the content.

[RogerEvans]

If my tongue were further in my cheek it would be visible from outside!

Roger

[ajgriff]

Originally Posted by RogerEvans

Shouldn't the title of this thread be 'from where is the random wrong punctuation coming?' Something to do with not ending a sentence with a preposition. Up with which I will not put!

Tongue in cheek acknowledged but this is a quote from Merriam-Webster:

"Ending a sentence with a preposition is permissible in the English language. There are theories that the false rule originates with the early usage guides of Joshua Poole and John Dryden, who were trying to align the language with Latin, but there is no reason to suggest ending a sentence with a preposition is wrong."

Originally Posted by merlinmaxwell

English is an evolving non proscribed language ....

True but unless we stick to some widely accepted conventions effective communication becomes difficult. As Rich points out TVs means something completely different from TV's.

Alan

[SiriusHardware]

At work, the person whose job it is to organise infrastructure things recently decided to put signs on all the departmental doors so that people could find their way around more easily.

I spotted the one he'd put on our door when I was still about 30 feet away. It said:-

REPAIR'S

The apostrophe didn't survive for very long - (mere minutes).

[Uncle Bulgaria]

I have a studio next to a sign printer. They have a sign on the gate saying 'SMILE YOUR ON CCTV'. I can't say it fills me with confidence that they'd make me a good sign.

Every time I see a van or business with egregiously badly written signage I wonder how many people had to OK that design before it was produced. However, I've just had a letter from the Tate gallery asking me to renew my 'locals pass'. I expect they write it off as artistic licence.

[kalee20]

Originally Posted by slidertogrid

The title I put was "TVs" which as I understand it is the plural of TV

Hmm.

Adding a letter 's' does pluralise a noun (or sometimes 'es,' if the singular ends in 's,' 'x,' or 'z,' or 'ies' after dropping a final 'y' in the singular, but not if it's 'ey' at the end of the singular; or 'ves' if the singular ends in 'f' but not in 'ff' - or occasionally you pluralise by adding 'ren').

However, TV is an abbreviation, so I'd certainly pluralise it as TV's where the apostrophe denotes not possession, but missing letters.

If in doubt, rewrite - thus 'TV Receivers' would cause no doubt, or 'TV Sets,' or just 'Televisions.' Or (as folk used to do) put full-stops in, thus 'T.V.'s.'

[Uncle Bulgaria]

That's interesting. I'd certainly write "TVs", in the same way as writing "1960s". I suppose following the line to its logical conclusion, we'd have T'V's! Or, in Roald Dahl's world, 'Mike Teevee'.

Quite a lot is individual style. I was always ribbed by my Latin teacher as my sub-clause-fuelled translations were reminiscent of Lord Macaulay.

[paulsherwin]

There has always been some disagreement about the correct use of apostrophes. In the eighteenth century they were used quite loosely to indicate possession, abbreviations and plurals. The Victorians tightened up on this, and that's when the apostrophe ceased to be used to disambiguate plurals, at least by 'gentlemen'. English is basically a mess, because it descends from two incompatible phonetic and grammatic standards (Low German, like Dutch, and Latinate Norman French.)

[Station X]

"It's and "its" catch people out.

It's a chair and its seat is upholstered.

[ColinB]

I always think of it's as being possessive as well and/or an abbreviation of 'it is', so I'd have written that as:

It's a chair and it's seat is upholstered.

Every day's a school day...

See what I did there?

[ajgriff]

Originally Posted by kalee20

However, TV is an abbreviation, so I'd certainly pluralise it as TV's where the apostrophe denotes not possession, but missing letters.

With very few exceptions it is accepted practice today for abbreviations and acronyms to be expressed in capital letters and pluralised by the simple addition of the letter s. An apostrophe denotes possession although it is sometimes used to replace missing letters in which case you'd arrive at t'v's for televisions. Search Google if you don't believe me.

Alan

PS Using its to signify possession is of course an exception that proves the rule! Isn't the English language wonderful?

[Station X]

Originally Posted by ColinB

I always think of it's as being possessive as well and/or an abbreviation of 'it is', so I'd have written that as:

It's a chair and it's seat is upholstered.

It's the exception to the rule though. A possessive form with no apostrophe. That's why it catches people out.

As my English teacher said "You wouldn't say the dog followed it is owner, would you?

[Dave Moll]

Basically the apostrophe for possessive only applies to nouns, not pronouns.

[ms660]

If I said there was a load of vintage TV's for disposal at my house I reckon most sane folks would understand wot's meant.

Lawrence.

[ajgriff]

Originally Posted by ms660

If I said there was a load of vintage TV's for disposal at my house I reckon most sane folks would understand wot's meant.

Yes it's often possible to interpret incorrect grammar and spelling correctly, but not always unfortunately. Better to make the message as clear as possible in the first place.

Alan

[ms660]

Originally Posted by ajgriff

Yes it's often possible to interpret incorrect grammar and spelling correctly, but not always unfortunately. Better to make the message as clear as possible in the first place.

Alan

That would be well clear enough for me and most sane folks just like a bunch of free, working PX25's....