• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Stop! Grammar Time

Shazam!

Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Should you use a full stop after the word period when the word period is denoting a full stop?

ie.

Shazam! is a complete bellend period
Shazam! is a complete bellend period.

Or how about...

Shazam! should quit making topics full stop
Shazam! should quit making topics full stop.
 
Technically, the "period" and "full stop" are clauses, so they would properly be:

Shazam! is a complete bellend, period.
Shazam! should quit making topics, full stop.

ETA: CURSE YOU, LINDLEY!!!!
 
Yeah, I thought that but if period is denoting the full stop, technically that would make it "Shazam! is a complete bellend,."

Which is weird.
 
Well, no, because you don't pronounce punctuation. "Period" is just another word in the sentence.
 
Especially when you say “Period” while miming “Air quotes”.
You don't say “Period” while miming air quotes. You say “Quote - (sentence) - Unquote.”

And technically, this is about punctuation, not grammar.

Grammar is not a synonym for “correct use of language.” There's grammar (sentence structure and parts of speech), usage, and orthography (spelling).

And punctuation.
 
I have a question too, why is "USA" singular and not plural?

It should be plural, as in "The United States are" not "The United States is".

In fact, before the U.S. Civil War, that's how the country was referred to, as a plural, because it was a collection of several sovereign states, not a centralized nation.
 
I have a question too, why is "USA" singular and not plural?

It should be plural, as in "The United States are" not "The United States is".

In fact, before the U.S. Civil War, that's how the country was referred to, as a plural, because it was a collection of several sovereign states, not a centralized nation.

I can definitely see a rationalization for making it both singular and plural, and I think a lot of it just boils down to context.
 
Still, sounds weird to me.

Well, I don't know what to tell ya.

Do you say "The Netherlands is in a country in Europe" too?
I'm not disparaging the USA's nationhood or anything, it's just that gramatically it seems inconsistant to me when the country's name clearly indicates a plural.

It should be plural, as in "The United States are" not "The United States is".

In fact, before the U.S. Civil War, that's how the country was referred to, as a plural, because it was a collection of several sovereign states, not a centralized nation.

Hm. So maybe it was a deliberate change to indicate unity?
 
Still, sounds weird to me.

Well, I don't know what to tell ya.

Do you say "The Netherlands is in a country in Europe" too?
I'm not disparaging the USA's nationhood or anything, it's just that gramatically it seems inconsistant to me when the country's name clearly indicates a plural.

I honestly don't talk about the Netherlands much :p , but I think I would say "is" there as well. Not sure why.
 
I have a question too, why is "USA" singular and not plural?

It should be plural, as in "The United States are" not "The United States is".

In fact, before the U.S. Civil War, that's how the country was referred to, as a plural, because it was a collection of several sovereign states, not a centralized nation.

Yepper. I just finished watching the Ken Burns, The Civil War mini series where consultant/author Shelby Foote makes that exact statement.
 
It should be plural, as in "The United States are" not "The United States is".

In fact, before the U.S. Civil War, that's how the country was referred to, as a plural, because it was a collection of several sovereign states, not a centralized nation.

Hm. So maybe it was a deliberate change to indicate unity?

I don't think unity had anything to do with it. I think it was more of a rejection of the states' rights ideology that was common in both the North and South up until the Civil War.

Many people in both areas of the country felt that the individual states were sovereign and that the central government was subordinate to them - therefore, "the United States are."

However, after the war, many people began to think of the central government as sovereign and the state governments as subordinate. So, the change was made to "the United States is."
 
I have a question too, why is "USA" singular and not plural?

It should be plural, as in "The United States are" not "The United States is".

In fact, before the U.S. Civil War, that's how the country was referred to, as a plural, because it was a collection of several sovereign states, not a centralized nation.

Yepper. I just finished watching the Ken Burns, The Civil War mini series where consultant/author Shelby Foote makes that exact statement.
Which is why I think context is important. We're hardly in the middle of the Civil War right now. While there can be some pretty distinct differences between states these days, we are one singular nation. It really depends on the emphasis your trying to place. If I'm talking about the country as a whole, "The United States" is the name of that one country, and I would treat it as a singular noun.

But I could also see instances where it would be more appropriate to treat it as plural.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top