Orchid XP v7 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> I'm loving how they mix "week's" and "weeks'". Mmm, nice grammar.

  Look who's talking. ;)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:

> You did know you wee chantie rascal :)

Of course *I* know it - how am I going to award points if I don't know 
the correct answer myself? ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:

>   However, I see this "rule" being broken constantly everywhere, so I'm not
> at all sure if it really applies, or if it does, when. I have to admit that
> for example "a day's work" sounds ok, perhaps even better than "the work of
> a day".
> 
>   OTOH, there are situations where it's clearly misused. For example,
> I have seen "not as scary as you two's faces", which sounds really awkward.
> I would say "not as scary as the faces of you two" would be much better.

FWIW, I agree.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:

> Actually, it's "weeks'" - it's a possessive plural.

Indeed.

>>> Hey, I've been meaning to mention, you'd make a good writer. 
>>> Seriously, you use the English language quite well.
>> Really? Apart from the minor detail that I can't spell? (Indeed, that
>> guy fron Finland can spell English words better than I can...)
> 
> Well, apart from "fron" in the above paragraph, I hadn't noticed your 
> inability to spell.  Reading your posts here and in your blog, I've been 
> impressed by the quality of writing you turn out.

That's a typing error, not a spelling error. ;-)

> Besides, spelling and grammar checking are what editors are for. :-)

Heh! Who wants to be editor for my NG submissions? :-D

Oh, wait... nothing would ever get submitted. :-S

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Orchid XP v7 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> I'm loving how they mix "week's" and "weeks'". Mmm, nice grammar.
> 
>   Look who's talking. ;)

Thanks for that. :-P

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

>> Which is possession.  "The property of Tim" is grammatically equivalent
>> to "Tim's property".  "A day's work", as shorthand for "a day's worth of
>> work", that is to say, is equivalent to "the worth of a day of work";
>> the day possesses the *value* of the work done.
>
>  When I was in school they told us that in English "'s" should only be
> used with people, otherwise the "of" version should be used. For example,
> you shouldn't say "the house's window" but "the window of the house".

Yeh I was told that too, the reasoning being that only people could own 
things in the strictest sense of possession.  I try to use that most of the 
time but often it just sounds wrong.

What also confused me at an early age was why "its" didn't have an 
apostrophe, as in  "its lid is hot".  In my mind, it was indicating 
possession, like saying "the car's roof is red", why not "it's roof is red" 
(when you're using "it" instead of "the car")?

>  OTOH, there are situations where it's clearly misused. For example,
> I have seen "not as scary as you two's faces", which sounds really 
> awkward.
> I would say "not as scary as the faces of you two" would be much better.

"not as scary as your two faces" sounds better to me.  No idea if it's 
correct or not.

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Wed, 06 Feb 2008 22:00:18 -0000, Orchid XP v7 <voi### [at] devnull>  
did spake, saying:

> Stephen wrote:
>> On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 21:53:53 +0000, Orchid XP v7 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>>
>>> For 5 points, somebody tell me which one of those is the *correct* one  
>>> given the intended meaning. [Yes, they mean different things. No, you  
>>> can't just pick whichever one you fancy...]
>>  The rule is: apostrophe "s" if it belongs to the word. Plain "s" if it  
>> is a
>> plural.
>
> And if it belongs *and* is plural... apostrophe *after* the S. (But not  
> a lot of people know that.)
>
> So it should, in fact, be "one week's notice" and "four weeks' notice"  
> respectively. Interesting how they got it right later but messed up at  
> the beginning...

Or as Warp suggests a "notice of one week" and a "notice of four weeks".  
I'm still stuck on a site near me - is it "Weavers Wharf" as advertised,  
"Weaver's Wharf" as the council put it, or possible "Weavers' Wharf" which  
is what I called it?

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

scott <sco### [at] laptopcom> wrote:
> "not as scary as your two faces" sounds better to me.  No idea if it's 
> correct or not.

  That would mean a person with two faces... :P

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

>> "2.1.1 For the first 6 months
> ...
>> thereafter either party must give
>> at least four week's notice if you have been continuously employed for
>> up to four years
> ...
>> So... anybody wanna take a guess how much notice I'm supposed to give?
>>
>> [For bonus points, speculate how much notice you have to give if you've
>> worked for more than 6 months but less than 4 years.]
> ...
> 
> So four weeks' (*) notice should be given for an employment
> that has lasted between six months and 4 years.

Ah. I missed the "up to" part.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v7 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> "2.1.1 For the first 6 months of continuous employment the period of
> notice to be given in writing by either you of the Company to terminate
> your employment is one week's notice thereafter either party must give
> at least four week's notice if you have been continuously employed for
> up to four years and thereafter one additional week's notice for each
> completed year of continuous service up to a maximum of 12 weeks' notice
> after 12 years' service has been completed."

> So... anybody wanna take a guess how much notice I'm supposed to give?

> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
> http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

#macro Find_Weeks_Notice(Years_Employed)

  #declare Weeks_Notice = 1;

  #if (Years_Employed > .5)
    #declare Weeks_Notice = 4;
  #end

  #if (Years_Employed > 4)
    #declare Weeks_Notice = int(Years_Employed)
  #end

  #if (Years_Employed > 12)
    #declare Weeks_Notice = 12;
  #end

  #debug concat("Weeks notice required: ",str(Weeks_Notice))

#end



There.  I'm sure glad *WE* don't express ourselves in a way that others are
likely to find complicated or obscure.  ;-)


Best Regards,
Mike C.

Post a reply to this message