[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       debian-user
Subject:    Re: rsync
From:       Randy Kramer <rhkramer () gmail ! com>
Date:       2012-03-04 13:19:40
Message-ID: 201203040819.40388.rhkramer () gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sunday 04 March 2012 06:53:37 am Chris Bannister wrote:
> > Thank you
> > (I read "The Grammar of English Grammars" by Goold Brown. finished 35
> > of 11294 in one month. Hope can finish one day).
>
> Just be aware, the Americans have their own version of English.

I would have said just the opposite--the English have their own version of 
English.  ;-)  Oh, but I guess they did get there first. ;-)  

And then I see the .nz on your address, I know the Australians have their own 
version of English, I'll bet the New Zealanders do, also.

> "The Grammar of English Grammars" is the wrong book to be reading,
> i.e., there is no such word as "Grammars"

Then what is the plural of grammar?  There certainly seems to be a need / use 
for the plural--I've used "grammars" since around 1968 (and maybe earlier) 
when we talked about grammars for computer languages in class (as in "context 
free grammars").

I tried looking at Merriam Webster, and didn't see "grammars" (nor a plural) 
specifically listed--I don't know if that means there is no plural or that, 
since nothing different is specified, the standard addition of "s" does the 
job?  (Note, I can see only the abridged version of the Merriam Webster 
dictionary.)

Not that I consider Wikipedia (the encyclopedia) an authority on language 
usage, but they use "grammars" in their article on grammar.

Wiktionary lists grammars: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/grammars

Randy Kramer




-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201203040819.40388.rhkramer@gmail.com

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]