GRAMMAR FIENDS

but yes, "the pertuis family" is a far more elegant solution.

Grrrr, aargh, did the six billion grammar threads on old-ILX teach you NOTHING?!?!

ANYWAY, it seems to me now that if 'Pertuis family' weren't possible, it would have to be 'Pertuis' (i.e. no change from the singular). 'Pertuises' isn't the same as 'Joneses', because in 'Joneses' the 'e' is actually doing something.

eh? this might come as a surprise, but the relationship between orthography and pronunciation isn't absolute. nor, in fact, does it make any sense at all. i mean, just look at the way "pertwee" is spelt here anyway.

either way: you're wrong, and your thread's turned into a car crash anyway ;)

for no reason i can see, you're plucking obscure grammatical exceptions out of thin air ("ooh, 'chassis' doesn't change in the plural ... right, i bet this doesn't either") and trying to apply them to someone's surname. this is daft.

also: the pronunciation of "chassis" doesn't change. the pronunciation of "pertuises" does ("pertwee" v "pertwees").

ultimately, nobody's going to be able to make a definitive call on this except the pertuis family themselves; like i say, their name isn't a lexical item so it's pointless trying to apply rules of grammar to it. however, i'm making a sensible case based on several years of academic study of the english language; basic concepts of readability; and the fact i do this kind of shit for a living every day. you're arguing with ailsa and saying "chassis" and "chassises" a lot. i know who i'd trust ;p

xpost: stet, a) don't be a gigantic chopping-action chop; b) why aren't you in the pub? i thought i was coming out to meet you in half an hour?

You would recognise that 'Adams' (or if you like 'Adames') was the plural of 'Adam' rather than a singular 'Adams' because it would be followed by, e.g., 'are' rather than 'is'.

Also, there are no instances in English (I say this hoping to be proved wrong on this, by means of jokes if necessary) where an 'e' is introduced in the plural form where that 'e' is not pronounced.

xpost. Yes, Pertuix is the prettiest.

mais nous ne sommes pas francais, donc ... meh :)

The French forms are retained because there is no other, sensible, option.

yes. english orthography is noted for "sense", isn't it?

You would recognise that 'Adams' (or if you like 'Adames') was the plural of 'Adam' rather than a singular 'Adams' because it would be followed by, e.g., 'are' rather than 'is'.

eh? i'm talking about the surname "adams", not "the adams" as a plural of "the family whose surname is adams". but you're obviously determined to plough this singular furrow, and to be quite brutally frank i couldn't give less of a fuck as there's a whole city's worth of beer out there for me to drink (just as soon as mrs fiendish is ready, chiz).

ailsa: not sure. if i do, i will, but i've no idea what form the night is going to take :/

xpost, ha, right, that'll be the day that you're too drunk to argue about grammar...

The COD has it as either dos or - haha - do's.

i went to school with a girl whose surname was proudfoot. i can't remember whether it was her or someone else who insisted that the plural was proudfeet, but...whoever it was should have been right.

How can I fix:

"My students seemed to be more impressed by my car, which my family and I were standing in front of in the photo."

The comma doesn't work there, I know, but then it doesn't work without it either. I could fix the whole thing by replacing "My car" with "the car", but then that wouldn't indicate that it was my own vehicle.

"My studnets seemed to be much more captivated by the object that my family and I were standing in front of: my car."

Sigh.

Although studnet should probably be a word meaning someone who always catches "hot studs".

?

why not?

Hey, Steve, how would you rewrite this sentence: "I'm a fanny"?

Now, according to Fiendish, this sentence could apply equally to three girls called Françoise, or three boys called François. But anyone looking at it would automatically assume the former, not the latter. To avoid confusion, if you mean boys called François the sentence would have to be: "There are three François in my class."

Hence Fiendish's solution fatally fails the comprehension test, and clarity is surely at the heart of all editing decisions. Which means that Fiendish is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!

no it wouldn't. when did i say that? stop putting words in my mouth.

clarity, eh? how's this: "GIVE IT A REST, YOU TEDIOUS FUCKING PRICK."

Your solution to names that end in a silent 's' is to add "es" for plural. So for you, the plural of François is Françoises. And the plural of Françoise is Françoises.

clarity, eh? how's this: "GIVE IT A REST, YOU TEDIOUS FUCKING PRICK."

Christ. It's a thread entitled "grammar fiends". No need for gratuitous abuse.

no it isn't. my solution to "pertuis" is to add -es. it's a surname, where the pronunciation will not be obvious to many people. if you bother to read the thread, you'll see i've made this point at least twice. you might disagree. i appreciate that.

and, as i keep saying: it's a non-lexical item, therefore who's really to say how it should behave "gramatically"? not you, and not i. we've made our points - some more elegantly than others. as i've said so many times i'm bored shitless: the only people who really could give us a definitive answer are members of the pertuis family (and i bet there's division there too, heh).

No need for gratuitous abuse.

granted, that was a bit OTT and i apologise. but really, seriously: give it a fucking rest. eyeball kicks has made his decision, and it's based on his own intelligent reasoning. i disagree, but i respect his professional decision. for you to still be wittering on like a schoolboy some 18 hours after he said: "please, stop it now" is really, really fucking irritating.

and that's my final word on the matter.

Grimly, FWIW, I would agree with you if it wasn't a silent s. But it is.

xpost

GRIMLY VERSUS EVERYBODE:

http://sparky.thehold.net/pix/061205pertuises.jpg

(in 1975, they were attacked in the grammar pogroms. Cries of "But we're a non-lexical item!" went unheeded)

During my second month teaching English in China, I decided to show the students a picture of myself taken after my college graduation. I passed the photo around, expecting them to be interested in my mother and sister’s blonde hair, my cap and gown, and the American scenery in the background. Instead, they seemed to be much more captivated by the object that my family and I were standing in front of: my car. Soon, instead of learning words like graduation, tassel, and diploma, my students were saying Ford, driver’s license, and gas station. Although the class itself didn’t go as I had planned, I did learn something firsthand about the aspirations of China’s future.

I'm displaying the whole paragraph for context. Please feel free to evaluate, or reevaluate. And, thanks.

or

much more interested

express [adj.]
1 a : directly, firmly, and explicitly stated b : EXACT, PRECISE
2 a : designed for or adapted to its purpose b : of a particular sort : SPECIFIC

Please note that I'm in the "another think coming" camp, and invented the word Pertuix, so am possibly not to be trusted.

(xpost, or perhaps I am!)

(xpost, heh)