News1 min ago
Plural of an acronym
10 Answers
How do you write the plural of an acronym in a normal sentence? For instance is "Light Emitting Diodes" written as LEDs as I do? An apostrophe would be wrong in some cases but if the acronym ended in an S it could look even more confusing. Thanks.
Answers
1 to 10 of 10
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ll_billym. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Many people claim that 'true' acronyms are pronounceable as words...eg NATO = nay-toe, whereas the SAS is never = the sass. In those which are such so-called 'true' acronyms - eg your LED - just add a lower case s...LEDs as you already do. With those already ending in s, I'd use an apostrophe. For example, my partner is a Director of Studies, usually called a doss. If a collection of these were to meet, I'd write of them as a group of DOS's...that representing, I suppose, dosses!
QM2, I certainly have heard 'Light Emitting Diodes' called 'ledds', although that may not be common and I'm certainly no electronics expert.
I agree, obviously, with your CDs and LEDs, as my own earlier answer makes clear, but I'm not totally convinced about DOSs as - based purely on the pronunciation - there is a missing 'se'. There would be a temptation for anyone not familiar with the acronym just to say 'doss'.
Re pluralisation, how would you indicate that a student had used the letter 'a' too frequently in a word? Would you say, 'You've used "as" too often' or would you say, 'You've used "a's" too often'? (Yes, I know there is a multitude of other ways of expressing the thought, but I want it expressed as indicated!)
But what the hey! I'm not going to get overwrought about it.
I agree, obviously, with your CDs and LEDs, as my own earlier answer makes clear, but I'm not totally convinced about DOSs as - based purely on the pronunciation - there is a missing 'se'. There would be a temptation for anyone not familiar with the acronym just to say 'doss'.
Re pluralisation, how would you indicate that a student had used the letter 'a' too frequently in a word? Would you say, 'You've used "as" too often' or would you say, 'You've used "a's" too often'? (Yes, I know there is a multitude of other ways of expressing the thought, but I want it expressed as indicated!)
But what the hey! I'm not going to get overwrought about it.
I take your point completely QM - (as and is are certainly problematic if denoting the letters) but I think the solution is to express it differently (lexically) rather than 'borrow' a piece of punctuation.
And that 'missing syllable' point - well it does happen in other words (these are possessive apostrophes incidentally!): the witch's broomstick; the business's history etc.
Aren't we all glad English is our first language?!
And that 'missing syllable' point - well it does happen in other words (these are possessive apostrophes incidentally!): the witch's broomstick; the business's history etc.
Aren't we all glad English is our first language?!
There may be a generational thing involved here, Q. I had a look at the 'plurals' section of Fowler dealing with letters, figures and abbreviations. It says (quote)...
"All types were once normally written with 's: two VC's, the 1950's. Increasingly now the apostrophe is being dropped...but after letters an apostrophe is obligatory: dot your i's, mind your p's and q's."
So, there is a case for using an apostrophe to pluralise. However, the generational thing I referred to above is this...I'm 69 and was educated in the 1940s/1950s - or should that be 1940's/1950's? - and so it is perhaps understandable that I still use a pluralising apostrophe occasionally where modern grammarians might feel it to be wrong.
Well...that's my case anyway! Cheers
"All types were once normally written with 's: two VC's, the 1950's. Increasingly now the apostrophe is being dropped...but after letters an apostrophe is obligatory: dot your i's, mind your p's and q's."
So, there is a case for using an apostrophe to pluralise. However, the generational thing I referred to above is this...I'm 69 and was educated in the 1940s/1950s - or should that be 1940's/1950's? - and so it is perhaps understandable that I still use a pluralising apostrophe occasionally where modern grammarians might feel it to be wrong.
Well...that's my case anyway! Cheers
Did you actually read the rest of the thread before providing your own answer, Peoplespal! If you did, please explain to me which of your ONLY TWO apostrophe uses applies to the apostrophes in the saying: "Mind your p's and q's!" No possession by either letter is involved and there are no missing letters.
Hi quizmonster,
I didn't read the rest of the thread in great detail but I didn't understand your last point. As peoplespal said it is used to indicated possession so that does apply to "mind your p's and q's" the letters belong to you in that context so they are yours. Peoplespal rule does apply then.
I didn't read the rest of the thread in great detail but I didn't understand your last point. As peoplespal said it is used to indicated possession so that does apply to "mind your p's and q's" the letters belong to you in that context so they are yours. Peoplespal rule does apply then.
1 to 10 of 10
