next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Index of Subjects With all due respect Jim...and I mean that...I always appreciate your constuctive criticism...(or should that be criticisms?) ....but... ."Get a life! " Whether it is grammatically correct or not doesn't really matter. If I tell you I saw six woodcock or six woodcocks you have the information .....and I am sure the birds don't give a hoot! ....unless they are Owls.....( Am I correct in capitalizing " Owls? )..., and is it Barred Owls, or Barred owls .....and whichever it is, somebody is out there trying to change it I guess ....maybe to Forsyth Owl, or whatever. Andy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Wolford" <jimwolford@eastlink.ca> To: "naturens" <naturens@chebucto.ns.ca> Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2014 5:54 PM Subject: [NatureNS] question re plurals of bird names?? (from nitpicker Jim) >I have just read Ken McKenna’s latest posting, as usual full of interesting >stuff, but here is a question I have wanted to raise for some time now — >and this will bug some of you, who should sign off now…. > > In recent times, I have grown tired of trying to know when to apply an “s” > to make a plural vs. “knowing” which species are best left alone when > forming plural numbers. Especially problematic are “snipe” vs. “snipes” > or “woodcock” or “teal” etc. etc. I with my “common-sense” rules of > grammar have decided to just Anglicize all bird names by adding “s” or > “es” to all of them, as some of you have noted when I write “teals”, e.g. > > What say the rest of you? or does anyone care? Is this important to > anyone? > > Cheers from Jim in Wolfville. >
next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects