Plural for Plus
Bill Bliss
>Does anyone know how to spell the plural for plus? It's not in my
>dictionary. Pluses looks wrong, but so does plusses. The phrase plus(s)es
>and minuses is fairly common.
pli
-Bill-
Markus Laker
> ba...@netcom.com (barbara doran) wrote:
> pli
This reminds me of the (doubtless apocryphal) story of two Oxford dons, one
of whom wrote to the another: 'Would you care to visit me in my rooms on
Sunday morning? I have some interesting conundra concerning pendula.' He
received the reply: 'Haven't we better things to do on a Sunday than sitting
on our ba doing sa?'
Markus.
00nzwi...@bsuvc.bsu.edu
I'd like to recommend "plu's." as the plural for plus.
BTW, I do like the parenthetic oxymoron.
--
Nyal Z. Williams
00nzwi...@bsuvc.bsu.edu
Markus Laker
> > This reminds me of the (doubtless apocryphal) story of two Oxford dons, one
> > of whom wrote to the another: 'Would you care to visit me in my rooms on
> > Sunday morning? I have some interesting conundra concerning pendula.' He
> > received the reply: 'Haven't we better things to do on a Sunday than sitting
> > on our ba doing sa?'
> BTW, I do like the parenthetic oxymoron.
Touche'. You know that 'apocryphal' means 'of doubtful authenticity'. I
know it too. But most of the people around me think it means 'untrue'.
I've got into the habit of habit of using it with some synonym for 'perhaps'
just so that people don't think I'm telling tales I know to be false.
BTW, I hadn't noticed the irony of the fact that 'doubtless' means
'perhaps'. Is this one for Bob Cunningham's thread about words that have
drifted in meaning from their etyma?
--
Markus Laker.
Matt B. Woods
>Does anyone know how to spell the plural for plus? It's not in my
>dictionary. Pluses looks wrong, but so does plusses. The phrase plus(s)es
>and minuses is fairly common.
**Webster's New Dictionary of the AMERICAN Language says,
Plus (preposition) Blah Blah Yadda Yadda
n., pl. plus'es, plus'ses
Woffle woffle rhubarb.
** Idea,
The word processor Word 5.1 has an inbuilt spell checker (very
definitive eh!) [PS. It's set up for English (AUS) spelling]
It rejected both of the above options, and instead suggested
plus's
which seems quite reasonable actually, as the apostrophe would be there
to indicate a missing "e".
Raymond = rsc...@math.otago.ac.nz
The Hermit
You sure Word isn't suggesting that because it thinks you're trying to
indicate possession? I use Word, and I find the spell checker is terrible
at figuring out what part of speech I'm attempting to use. It often
suggests (mis)spellings under these circumstances.
Anno Siegel
Markus Laker <la...@tcp.co.uk> wrote:
[...]
>BTW, I hadn't noticed the irony of the fact that 'doubtless' means
>'perhaps'. Is this one for Bob Cunningham's thread about words that have
>drifted in meaning from their etyma?
Reminds me of the use of "I'm afraid..." in place of "I'm sorry, but..."
Visitor: "Is Mr Jones in?"
Butler: "I'm afraid he is away." (Knowing full well he is.)
This use of "afraid" (is it still commonly used that way?) has always
stricken me as a particularly quaint example of British understatement.
"Doubtless" meaning "perhaps" is actually a case of eminent overstatement.
Why I feel they belong into the same category I don't know.
Anno
Truly Donovan
>
>Reminds me of the use of "I'm afraid..." in place of "I'm sorry, but..."
>
>Visitor: "Is Mr Jones in?"
>Butler: "I'm afraid he is away." (Knowing full well he is.)
>
>This use of "afraid" (is it still commonly used that way?) has always
>stricken me as a particularly quaint example of British understatement.
>
In America, one can be stricken (generally in such a way as to require an
ambulance, but not necessarily), but if something else does it to you, it
would be "struck."
Anyhow, "afraid" might be understatement, but it isn't the exclusive
property of the British, being commonly used in America, where we are
well-known to be pathologically incapable of understatement.
Truly Donovan, to whom egregious overstatement is an art form in itself