Topic: Pet Peeve (Plural of "CD") (Read 6932 times)

skidoo · « **on:** November 17, 2003, 09:15:26 pm »

FYI: The plural of "CD" is not "CD's."

BullishDad · « **Reply #1 on:** November 17, 2003, 10:15:52 pm »

You are correct. Whether it's Compact Disks or Certificates of Deposit. A number of years ago, I researched this for an advertisment. It is amazing how often you see it wrong. Not just CDs either, just about any acronym that needs to be made plural will do.

nameless · « **Reply #2 on:** November 17, 2003, 11:37:03 pm »

Quote from: BullishDad on November 17, 2003, 10:15:52 pm

You are correct. Whether it's Compact Disks or Certificates of Deposit. A number of years ago, I researched this for an advertisment. It is amazing how often you see it wrong. Not just CDs either, just about any acronym that needs to be made plural will do.

Well, if we're being picky, it's not "compact disks", it's "compact discs", and "CD" isn't an acronym, it's an initialism.

As for the validity of "CD's", I tend to agree that it doesn't look quite right, and I usually use "CDs" myself, but I have the second edition of Diana Hacker's A Writer's Reference, and it indicates that it is correct to use apostrophes for the plural of abbreviations.

If you really want to learn something interesting and appropriate for this thread, click here.

DougHamm · « **Reply #3 on:** November 18, 2003, 12:27:18 am »

(On a side note, I'm drunker'n Hell right now...otherwise I'd likely overlook this thread).

I've always had a pet peeve with apostrophes and initialisms. Never heard of this Diana Hacker before, but I believe she's bowing to the same social conformance that would would allow the spelling of "e-mail" without a hyphen.

Or is that an en-dash?

Did I mention I'm drunk?

-Doug

jleerigby · « **Reply #4 on:** November 18, 2003, 02:09:57 am »

I wish I could spell 'apostrophes' and 'initialisms' when I'm drunk. I bet you cut and pasted!

crowfan · « **Reply #5 on:** November 18, 2003, 07:55:14 am »

I'm a technical writer by trade, and I've run across this problem a couple of times. While it is correct to write "CDs" it is also acceptable (though not usual or even encouraged) to write "CD's," the reason being that it's an abbreviation/initialism, and it's distinguishing the plural "s" from being part of the abbreviated form of the word. I certainly don't like it or use it in my writing, but it's technically "acceptable" from what I know.

crow

JimH · « **Reply #6 on:** November 18, 2003, 08:07:14 am »

Crowfan is correct.

markp99 · « **Reply #7 on:** November 18, 2003, 09:37:24 am »

I use apostrophes with abbv's all the time...

Sorry skidoo!

KingSparta · « **Reply #8 on:** November 18, 2003, 09:43:13 am »

God...

Uwe · « **Reply #9 on:** November 18, 2003, 10:01:07 am »

what is correct: nitpicker or nit-picker ?

crowfan · « **Reply #10 on:** November 18, 2003, 10:11:36 am »

Quote from: Uwe on November 18, 2003, 10:01:07 am

what is correct: nitpicker or nit-picker ?

crow

skidoo · « **Reply #11 on:** November 18, 2003, 11:14:12 am »

Quote from: crowfan on November 18, 2003, 07:55:14 am

I certainly don't like it or use it in my writing, but it's technically "acceptable" from what I know.

Read: excused. But still incorrect.

sraymond · « **Reply #12 on:** November 18, 2003, 12:29:57 pm »

Quote from: JimH on November 18, 2003, 08:07:14 am

Crowfan is correct.

By who's authority? It is incorrect to call something correct (or incorrect, for that matter) without a qualification.

Philips Rubens' "Science and Technical Writing - A Manual if Style" (1992) directs that plurals of initialsms are often indicated by adding a lowercase s to the initialism. He then qualifies that some organizations still prefer an apostrophe before the lowercase s - but cautions, unless required to follow a specific style, to reserve the apostrophe for the possessive case.

So... does that mean that those who use the apostrophe willy-nilly do so: a) out of ignorance, 2) because they're following a specific style, or 3) because they're dinosaurs from a long-ago (twenty years) era?

Scott-

LisaRCT · « **Reply #13 on:** November 18, 2003, 01:51:11 pm »

Sheesh, and I thought I had too much free time

marketability · « **Reply #14 on:** November 18, 2003, 04:54:26 pm »

The CD's cover was burned (the single cover of a single CD was burned)
The CDs cover was burned (The single cover of many CDs was burned)

...hmmmmmmm

continue thinking about this or have a beer.... tricky

John Gateley · « **Reply #15 on:** November 18, 2003, 05:05:12 pm »

Quote from: marketability on November 18, 2003, 04:54:26 pm

The CDs cover was burned (The single cover of many CDs was burned)

The CDs' cover was burned (the single cover of many CDs was burned).

j

nameless · « **Reply #16 on:** November 18, 2003, 05:53:55 pm »

When in doubt, spell it out!

"I bought two compact discs today."

Cmagic · « **Reply #17 on:** November 18, 2003, 06:03:25 pm »

IMHO the plural of CD is MC... (9.1 of course)

C.

JollyJim · « **Reply #18 on:** November 19, 2003, 12:29:40 am »

I bought a new CD today.

Then, I bought another one.....

sraymond · « **Reply #19 on:** November 19, 2003, 12:56:02 am »

Quote from: marketability on November 18, 2003, 04:54:26 pm

The CD's cover was burned (the single cover of a single CD was burned)
The CDs cover was burned (The single cover of many CDs was burned)

...hmmmmmmm

continue thinking about this or have a beer.... tricky

After a few beers, a great meal, and half a bottle of merlot, I've come to the conclusion that possessive apostrophes are overrated.

How about: "The cover of the CDs was burned" or "The cover of the CD was burned" or "The covers of the CDs were burned" or ... awww.... I need another glass of wine.

Scott-

NickM · « **Reply #20 on:** November 20, 2003, 09:21:55 am »

Don't call me Shirley, but...

The CDs were burned ( many Compact Discs having been produced )
One of the CDs was burnt ( as a result of a bad writer )
The CD covers were printed
The burned CD covers were kept
The burnt CD's cover was thrown...

nick

Bartabedian · « **Reply #21 on:** November 20, 2003, 10:24:51 am »

Reading thi's thread i's goin'g to make's people's hair's fall's out, what's the deal's wit's you peep's anyway's?

DougHamm · « **Reply #22 on:** November 20, 2003, 12:03:20 pm »

Quote from: WarrenPeace on November 20, 2003, 10:24:51 am

Reading thi's thread i's goin'g to make's people's hair's fall's out, what's the deal's wit's you peep's anyway's?

We're doing our part to ensure that future versions of MediaCenter are grammatically perfect!

-Doug

8thNote · « **Reply #23 on:** November 20, 2003, 02:51:33 pm »

What about plural of a single letter? "Ts" or "T's"?

marketability · « **Reply #24 on:** November 20, 2003, 02:57:03 pm »

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

JimH · « **Reply #25 on:** November 20, 2003, 03:31:25 pm »

At a linguists' convention, a speaker ends a long and boring talk with this:

"As I leave you tonight, I want to ask you to think for a while about this: If there are so many double negatives, why is there not even a single double positive?"

Response from the back of the room:

"Yeah..yeah..."

sraymond · « **Reply #26 on:** November 20, 2003, 04:06:26 pm »

Quote from: 8thNote on November 20, 2003, 02:51:33 pm

What about plural of a single letter? "Ts" or "T's"?

Might a single letter be the ultimate in short initialisms?

Scott-

mindracing · « **Reply #27 on:** November 20, 2003, 04:54:42 pm »

And now that we're all searching through dictionaries, did you know that gullable is the only English word not found in any dictionary?

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=gullable

sraymond · « **Reply #28 on:** November 20, 2003, 07:47:40 pm »

Quote from: mindracing on November 20, 2003, 04:54:42 pm

And now that we're all searching through dictionaries, did you know that gullable is the only English word not found in any dictionary?

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=gullable

Will anyone fall for this? It reminds me of someone's e-mail promising that there's a website where you can find anyone's drivers license photo online. They suggest you first look for your own... and the search returns the photo of a monkey.

Scott-

LisaRCT · « **Reply #29 on:** November 20, 2003, 11:44:29 pm »

Quote from: sraymond on November 20, 2003, 07:47:40 pm

Quote from: mindracing on November 20, 2003, 04:54:42 pm
And now that we're all searching through dictionaries, did you know that gullable is the only English word not found in any dictionary?

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=gullable

Will anyone fall for this? It reminds me of someone's e-mail promising that there's a website where you can find anyone's drivers license photo online. They suggest you first look for your own... and the search returns the photo of a monkey.

Scott-

Oh, A monkey you say??

I saw that once and wondered

NBachers · « **Reply #30 on:** November 22, 2003, 10:35:27 pm »

I was almost gullible enuf to beleive that posting about gullable.
Although the apostrophe usually denotes a possessive, it's also used occasionally as a separator. Without it, the "s" tends to get lumped in as the third initial in a two-initial term- as in "cee dee ess" instead of the pluralization of "cee dee." The apostrophe is a minor infraction of the rules that's permitted because it indicates what the true intention of the "s" really is.

sub-24 · « **Reply #31 on:** November 23, 2003, 04:18:35 pm »

The CD's cover was burned (the single cover of a single CD was burned)
The CDs cover was burned (The single cover of many CDs was burned)

How about

The Cd's cover was burn't
The Cd covers were burn't

That sounds okay to me.

Nolonemo · « **Reply #32 on:** November 23, 2003, 05:20:07 pm »

DougHamm,

That would be a hyphen (e-mail), an en dash is used when connecting a word with a hypenated phrase, e.g. anti–e-mail (sorry, best I could think of).

Cheers!

sraymond · « **Reply #33 on:** November 23, 2003, 05:48:22 pm »

Quote from: mikeh on November 23, 2003, 04:18:35 pm

The CD's cover was burned (the single cover of a single CD was burned)
The CDs cover was burned (The single cover of many CDs was burned)

How about

The Cd's cover was burn't
The Cd covers were burn't

That sounds okay to me.

Oh, great, now you want to change the form of the initialism to suit the possessive. In that case, why not just create your own initialism for the plural possessive?

Scott-

P.S. I can't believe this thread has gone on for so long... we really ought to keep DougHamm from drinking!

DougHamm · « **Reply #34 on:** November 24, 2003, 04:17:58 pm »

Quote from: sraymond on November 23, 2003, 05:48:22 pm

I can't believe this thread has gone on for so long... we really ought to keep DougHamm from drinking!

Nah...when I'm sober I talk about anthropology! This is much more engaging.

-Doug

>hic<

Sam · « **Reply #35 on:** November 24, 2003, 04:45:23 pm »

Quote from: John Gateley on November 18, 2003, 05:05:12 pm

Quote from: marketability on November 18, 2003, 04:54:26 pm
The CDs cover was burned (The single cover of many CDs was burned)

The CDs' cover was burned (the single cover of many CDs was burned).

j

William Strunk says it should be:
"The CDs's cover was burned."
http://www.bartleby.com/141/strunk.html#1

Shows that authority and common practice are different things.

INTERACT FORUM

Author Topic: Pet Peeve (Plural of "CD") (Read 6932 times)

nameless

jleerigby

sraymond

LisaRCT

nameless

sraymond

sraymond

sraymond

LisaRCT

sraymond