? or not?

Last edited Fri Jun 26, 2015, 06:22 AM - Edit history (1)

Or read, or something.

While the '60s had their moments in the Sun, I like the '90-'10's music more. Mrs. 'Droid, however, would agree with you, postulater.

As a teen in the '70s and '80s, I was mostly embarrassed by what my peers found popular, excepting a few notable artists.

So I use a binary system and go with the '10s.

usage, and not because I like to correct others. However, your use of "there" above is incorrect. I just thought I should
point this out since this is a thread about language and correct usage.

I haven't taken a correction to a grammar error personal in many years. I'll edit. There and Their have always been a blind spot with me. I still friggin' reverse the "i" and the "e" in "their".

The decade of 2000s?

I've wondered about "aughts" but it doesn't sound right. I find myself saying things like "the two thousands" which doesn't make any sense really but everyone seems to know what I'm talking about.

I avoid noughts because it sounds and reads clunky. The 2000s work for me.

Another one of my friends who was there said "Yep". My friend Richard (RIP, I posted about his death from cancer here a few years ago) said he was SERIOUS... and repeated the question.

"Exactly."

"Why are you being such a dick?"

"About what?"

"What. Do. You. Call. A. Bunch. Of. Bananas?"

My other friend said "Exactly".

"Serious?"

"About what?"

We were laughing so hard we were crying, because he was 100% sincere in asking the question.

From http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/apostro.asp

There are different schools of thought about years and decades. The following examples are all in widespread use:

Examples:
the 1990s
the 1990's
the '90s
the 90's

Awkward: the '90's

While these misuses of apostophes in dates may be in widespread use, "ain't" is also in widespread use. Widespread use is not an endorsement for correct grammar.

Apostrophe S is not a plural in any instance, but is either a conjunction or a possessive. In order to maintain consistency, applying the rules of an apostrophe in these instances as a placeholder for missing information seems most appropriate.

While I am sure Ms. Strauss' book is easy to read, as advertised, I find it ludicrous that she was unable to find "...a book that conveyed the rules of English in, well, plain English". I struggled with grammar until I found Strunk and White's little book, read it in a single day, and walked away a much better writer. At my library there were four copies of the book on the shelf.

I'll stick with the reputable Strunk and White's Elements of Style and the AP Stylebook over some lone 30-year-old book that I've never seen in a library and was unaware of until today.

It is not. That is why there is so much variety in the usage books. Older English grammar books are pretty consistent with each other, but most modern linguists agree that the grammar in them is based on Latin and quite inappropriate. Pedantry is not pretty.

S and W's first printed edition of Elements of Style is barely 50 years old, and Time magazine named it in 2011 as one of the 100 best and most influential books written in English since 1923. Linguists and writing experts update The AP Stylebook often, so I find it improbable that "most modern linguists agree that the grammar in them is based on Latin and quite inappropriate."

This debate is a bit like the argument that climate change is a fallacy. While there may be a few climate scientists who say that global warming is a hoax, just as there might an author who provides incorrect information about date formats, by and large the rest of the experts agree the planet is warming, just as most professional writers and grammarians know the proper way to shorten numerical years.

The rules of grammar and style are formal, the best writers break those rules with intent, and well executed style is the hallmark of quality writing. Language is also malleable, and rules certainly change over time, but it has yet to be the case of the formats of dates, regardless of what a self-described "aspiring waitress" wrote in her blue book.

You are right that pedantry isn't pretty, yet neither is sloppy writing. After I wrote my response, I considered softening the message to make it less snooty. After consideration, I decided against weakening the voice, because my contention is correct.

As a professional editor, I refuse to pretend that a mistake is somehow correct simply because the person who made the mistake dislikes the tone of voice of the person who points it out.

There once was a young man who attended a Monty Python concert which was late in getting started. When finally the troupe did come on stage the audience went wild as did the young man. He jumped up and down and yelled, "It's them! It's them!" The little lady sitting next to him said sternly, "It's they! It's they!"

Thanks for the laugh, rock.

Sorry if I offended you any.

I'm attempting to be more aware of the unnecessary snark that comes out of my keyboard. Have a great weekend.

You just made my writing a little bit better. I always appreciate that.

the style was '90s. The apostrophe indicates that something is missing, as in "ma'am", in which the "d" is missing from "madam".

That's been how I've written it since the 80's...I mean, '80s.

same

and your punctuation is correct.

Pet peeve of mine, too.

I'm guessing that is wrong too.

How are we supposed to type temperatures? Like 80s, 90s?

And I wish somebody would explain hang vs hung to copy editors. I see people being hung to death all the time.