http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_244a.html
It pains me to point this out (well, OK, actually it gives me a certain little thrill) but as the column is on the nicieties of English communication, specifically Brithish English, I feel I must note that the British do no employ periods a the ends of sentences nor abbreviations. They use a full stop.
If you suggest to an Englishman his letter has too many periods in it (and it’s not about P.M.T.) he will look at you funny. And the British look at us funny for enough reasons as it is.
Well first of all, the British don’t call periods “full stops”. American’s call full stops "periods’. Just ask any Englishman .
Secondly, OK, I won’t say Cecil was wrong (as I don’t want to frogmarched off to the SDMB re-education camp )but just that in column about the nicites of Briish English, the nicites of British English should be observered.
That and I’m in a particularly pedantic mood today.
I back betenoir’s position. Cecil is wrong to suggest that Brits have ever given a damn about periods. All we care about is the correct and judicious use of full stops.
Correct. Cecil was writing that (in 1985) with a US audience in mind. This was pre-Internet, and he wouldn’t have assumed UK readers. Thus, he used the term Americans were familiar with.
How much has the American style changed since that article was written? Does the left-pond crew still write “Mr. A. N. Other”, or have you succumbed to our free ‘n’ easy British stylee? Using full stops in abbreviations like that looks very dated to my eye, not to mention tripping up the reader who thinks he has reached the end of a sentence when it’s really just an abbrev. with a full stop.
Being Cecil, yes should have. A simple note about what the English call it is an opportunity for one of his snarky remarks as well as “English proofing” his argument) full stop
I would think that if one is going to be pedantic about what the “Brithish”, or even the “Briish”, call certain punctuation marks, once should be equally pedantic about the spelling of that population’s name.
I would suggest that that is not so much a case of “not being pedantic” in terms of spelling so much as it is “being utterly careless”. Not quite the same thing. Just to be pedantic about it. However I will accept my chastisement, and my Gaudere shaped trophy.
And thanks, Chairman Pow, that’s kind of what I was thinking. Beyond Cecil maintaining strict accuracy he also should never pass up the possibility of a snarky remark.
WEell, there you go. Of course you’re going to get all confused if you think of it as a full stop. Life goes on after a period. The only full stop is death.
And if one were being truely pedantic (and I’m trying to be) one could note that “full stop” is a sillly phrase. Either one stops or one doesn’t. You can’t partially stop.
But then that’s all the more reason I think Cecil should have mentioned it…it’s something we could use whenever the Brits sneer at us for “a more perfect union”.
I want to thank you, betenoir, for honoring a local custom. I forget whose Law it is, but every post that corrects somebody else’s grammar or spelling will contain errors in grammar or spelling.
That would be Gaudere’s law, which, not only do I know and you don’t, preserving my reputation as an annoying pedant that I am trying to establish in this thread, but is also something I referenced back in post #12.
So nyah ! (Further reinforcing me reputation as annoying…my reputation as a bad speller should be firmly established by now…)
Speaking of which, if a . is a full stop, is there another piece of punctuation that’s called a “partial stop” or a “half stop” or an “empty stop” or some such? The semicolon or comma, perhaps?
.
)but just that in column about the nicites of Briish English, the nicites of British English should be observered.