Apostrophes and You

[Kaight]

mmmmm malbec

[WizardEQ]

Fo'c's'le is a correct "word" meaning forecastle. Sailors would know the former, but may not know the latter. However, few others know this word and most would say it isn't a word.

I posit that is more screwed up than using duo'd or cc'd which are not words in the traditional sense. Language is a living, breathing organism that adapts to what people are willing to accept during certain times. I'm all for correct, proper English. But when it comes to rolling out a text or a PM, why not abbreviate if everyone knows what you're trying to convey?

[paulgiamatti]

Originally Posted by WizardEQ [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Fo'c's'le is a correct "word" meaning forecastle. Sailors would know the former, but may not know the latter. However, few others know this word and most would say it isn't a word.

Well, it's also still a contraction. Traditionally contractions are only meant to combine and shorten two separate words, but there are exceptions where the two words being contracted have already been condensed into one composite word - "cannot" becomes "can't", for example. In your example, the words "fore" and "castle" have already been condensed into one word, so the contraction serves more as an abbreviation of a single word rather than a connecting point between two separate words. You can drop any one or two of those apostrophes and the word is still just as technically "correct".

Originally Posted by WizardEQ [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I posit that is more screwed up than using duo'd or cc'd which are not words in the traditional sense.

I disagree, because all of the contracted versions of "forecastle" are serving the purpose of abbreviation. Nothing is being subtracted from "duo'd", or "solo'd", or "CC'd", so I'd take the hard line that they aren't contractions and that contractions simply can't be used to abbreviate words in the past tense, because all you'd be doing is replacing one letter with an apostrophe.

Originally Posted by WizardEQ [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Language is a living, breathing organism that adapts to what people are willing to accept during certain times.

Absolutely - I just need at least some kind of functionality in order to accept a colloquial word. "Gonna", "shoulda", "prolly", et al make perfect sense to me because they're easier to speak or write. I suppose you could argue that within the context of some EQ acronyms, an apostrophe is more understandable. "CCed that mob" might prompt someone to wonder exactly what "crowd control education" entails, or how one might educate this NPC in the ways of crowd control. Also, you could argue that the apostrophe is better when using variable-width fonts simply by virtue of saving millimeters in screen space.

Originally Posted by WizardEQ [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm all for correct, proper English. But when it comes to rolling out a text or a PM, why not abbreviate if everyone knows what you're trying to convey?

Because a lot of the time (I just visualized an Alot made out of time) they aren't abbreviations. If you can be proper without sacrificing efficiency or comprehensibility, then why not be proper?

[paulgiamatti]

Originally Posted by paulgiamatti [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You can drop any one or two of those apostrophes and the word is still just as technically "correct".

Meaning if you were to drop the apostrophe in lieu of the subtracted letters.

Originally Posted by paulgiamatti [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

contractions simply can't be used to abbreviate words in the past tense, because all you'd be doing is replacing one letter with an apostrophe.

Meaning for the sole purpose of shortening only the past tense component of that word. Obviously you can still abbreviate past tense words, e.g., "Dude, you totally got fo'c's'led.

[maskedmelonpai]

glad to see lotta dicsuction on how to properly conjugate acronyms now. i liek words too :3

past tense of "lol" though is "lol"



if people were going round saying liek "loot'd" or "camp'd", y'all'd've had an interesting observation that sorta make some sense, but they not and here you is arguing for a unintuitive conjugation that confusing because it fail to preserve the nature of the acronym.

how you think a normal person gonna pronounce "cced" if they never seen it? They might think it a acronym and ask, "what see-see-ee-dee stand for?" or they might say, "what is see-sed?" utilizing proper capitalization help a little if you say "CCed," but then they still gonna probably ask what "see-see" means 90% the time.

the " 'd" preserve the acronym while indicating something else, which everyone (even people it rustle) understand as indicating it already happened. it intuitive and that why it utilized.

[maskedmelonpai]

i meant to say,

"but they still gonna ask what see-sed mean 90% of the time."

my iPhone betray me :c it taken long time to train it to accept what I tell it, but it still ignore me sometime >.>

[coldslaw]

Originally Posted by maskedmelonpai [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

past tense of "lol" though is "lol"

False. It's "l'dol"

Joking aside, can it not actually be whatever anyone wants it to be because its a acronym that as progressed into almost becoming a word of its own. There's really no standard definition on proper usage yet, other than it means "laugh out loud."

Kind of neat to be able to watch the evolution of a language in real time.

[Cecily]

Devolution.

[NachtMystium]

Originally Posted by Cecily [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Devolution.

God of Terror, very low dost thou bring us. Very low hast thou brought us.

[paulgiamatti]

Originally Posted by Cecily [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Devolution.

I prefer to call it idiocratization.