| |||||||||||||
The Lions book (more nitpicking)The Lions book (more nitpicking)Posted Aug 19, 2003 18:15 UTC (Tue) by ikegami (guest, #14174)In reply to: The Lions book (more nitpicking) by rfunk Parent article: Why SCO won't show the code
: Also, it's Lions', not Lion's, since the author's name is John Lions rather than John Lion. If you're gonna nitpick on spelling, get it right! The possessive form of "Lions" is "Lions's" because it's singular. (singular) pro, James, Lions
(Log in to post comments)
The Lions book (more nitpicking) Posted Aug 19, 2003 18:27 UTC (Tue) by rfunk (subscriber, #4054) [Link] If you're gonna nitpick on spelling, get it right! I did. I gave the title of the book as it is on the cover, not what some manual on English says it should be. Then I explained why it's that way on the cover.
The possessive form of "Lions" is "Lions's" because it's singular.
That's a matter of some debate. For example: It's a living human language, therefore there are inconsistencies and uncertainties. Deal with it. The title of this book, however, is not uncertain.
The Lions book (more nitpicking) Posted Aug 20, 2003 8:19 UTC (Wed) by rjamestaylor (guest, #339) [Link] ikegami, I'd give it up. He's likely to bring in his partner Wagnall to buttress his arguments. Then you'd really be toast.;)
|
|||||||||||||