0
Usenet Posted 23 years ago
Usage
Error in Complete Plain Words?
On page 132 of the 3rd edition of Gower's Complete Plain Words:
Agenda, though in form plural, has been admitted to the language as a singular word.
Data, like agenda, remains the plural word that it is in Latin.
These sentences seem to me contradictory. I wonder if anyone can confirm whether the wording was the same in earlier editions. I hardly think it likely that such an error would have survived 50 years of examination. So, either there is no error and I am wrong, or the error is newly introduced.
Any help?
R.
Agenda, though in form plural, has been admitted to the language as a singular word.
Data, like agenda, remains the plural word that it is in Latin.
These sentences seem to me contradictory. I wonder if anyone can confirm whether the wording was the same in earlier editions. I hardly think it likely that such an error would have survived 50 years of examination. So, either there is no error and I am wrong, or the error is newly introduced.
Any help?
R.
Top answer
) Typo -- in the 2nd edition it's "unlike agenda". David
- ) Typo -- in the 2nd edition it's "unlike agenda".
- David
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
10 Answers
0
(Who is this "Gower" of whom you speak?)
Typo -- in the 2nd edition it's "unlike agenda".
David
Typo -- in the 2nd edition it's "unlike agenda".
David
00
In the "First American edition", 1988, which refers to the authorship as "by Sir Ernest Gowers, revised by Sidney Greenbaum & Janet Whitcut", the text is as given above. One has to doubt that the revision would have introduced the remarks, so presumably they passed the reviewers as acceptable.
My supposition would be that the intent was to say that "agenda" and "data" are each plural in
My supposition would be that the intent was to say that "agenda" and "data" are each plural in
00
(...)
Fascinating. In an earlier post, I noted that the revised (by Greenbaum & Whitcut) first American edition still carries the "like agenda" remark. That says much about the business of publishing.
-- Cordially, Eric Walker My opinions on English are available at http://owlcroft.com/english/
Fascinating. In an earlier post, I noted that the revised (by Greenbaum & Whitcut) first American edition still carries the "like agenda" remark. That says much about the business of publishing.
-- Cordially, Eric Walker My opinions on English are available at http://owlcroft.com/english/
00
The publishing history is:
Plain Words 1948 The ABC of Plain Words 1951 The Complete Plain Words (containing both of the above) 1954
All published by HM Stationary Office, primarily for the use of the civil service.
The Complete Plain Words published by Pelican Books 1962, reprinted up to 1972.
Second edition ("revised by Sir Bruce Fraser") published simultaneo
Plain Words 1948 The ABC of Plain Words 1951 The Complete Plain Words (containing both of the above) 1954
All published by HM Stationary Office, primarily for the use of the civil service.
The Complete Plain Words published by Pelican Books 1962, reprinted up to 1972.
Second edition ("revised by Sir Bruce Fraser") published simultaneo
00
(snip)
[nq:1]The Complete Plain Words published by Pelican Books 1962, reprinted up to 1972.[/nq]
(snip)
[nq:1]The first American edition is presumably a revision of the first British. All we know is that the Fraser edition ... case it must have slipped by an awful lot of people, or it was introduced in the first US edition.[/nq]
I have that "Pelican" edition. On p. 186: "Agenda, t
[nq:1]The Complete Plain Words published by Pelican Books 1962, reprinted up to 1972.[/nq]
(snip)
[nq:1]The first American edition is presumably a revision of the first British. All we know is that the Fraser edition ... case it must have slipped by an awful lot of people, or it was introduced in the first US edition.[/nq]
I have that "Pelican" edition. On p. 186: "Agenda, t
00
0
How typical. I apologise, my mistake. I find it impossible to note an error without adding one myself. No doubt there's one here too!
R.
R.
00
Don Aitken at (Email Removed) says in (Email Removed):
Don, has HMSO stayed in the one place for the whole of its life? Or can we borrow Galileo's words and say "Yet it moves"? Or do you want to draw our attention to the usual US pronunciation of that part of the office's name?
-- Quentin Burward.
Don, has HMSO stayed in the one place for the whole of its life? Or can we borrow Galileo's words and say "Yet it moves"? Or do you want to draw our attention to the usual US pronunciation of that part of the office's name?
-- Quentin Burward.
00
[nq:2]All published by HM Stationary Office, primarily for the use of the civil service.[/nq]
[nq:1]This used to be the Stationery Office. Is it still?[/nq]
Thank you for brightening up a boring day. The resulting spray of coffee onto the screen also helped in removing the correction fluid left over from my last typo.
Peter Moylan (Email Removed)
[nq:1]This used to be the Stationery Office. Is it still?[/nq]
Thank you for brightening up a boring day. The resulting spray of coffee onto the screen also helped in removing the correction fluid left over from my last typo.
Peter Moylan (Email Removed)
00
In article
[nq:2]All published by HM Stationary Office, primarily for the use of the civil service.[/nq]
[nq:1]This used to be the Stationery Office. Is it still?[/nq]
Nope. It used to travel between the Strand and Denmark Hill but it's been permanently sited elsewhere, so it's now stationary.
[nq:2]All published by HM Stationary Office, primarily for the use of the civil service.[/nq]
[nq:1]This used to be the Stationery Office. Is it still?[/nq]
Nope. It used to travel between the Strand and Denmark Hill but it's been permanently sited elsewhere, so it's now stationary.
0
Related Questions