# Why "Attorneys" General, etc? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 14, 2010, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164 "2010-10-14T19:27:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Tom\_Tildrum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e95f7d/32.png) [@Tom\_Tildrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Tildrum)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2010, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164/61 "2010-10-15T21:56:04Z")
> [@Giles](#): > > > [@Tom\_Tildrum](#): > > > > Or one zucchinus? > > It’s Italian, not Latin: it would be “uno zucchino”. The problem is that that’s not funny, because it doesn’t rhyme with “penis.” I like some amusement with my etymology. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2010, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164/62 "2010-10-15T22:40:35Z")
> [@pulykamell](#): > > There’s _gotta_ be an exception for that in the Chicago Manual of Style. I can’t imagine that style book advocating MPHs. I’ve never seen such a usage in print, ever. I checked, and I didn’t see anything specific. I suspect they just overlooked it. On the other hand, “Rotating at 500 RPMs” sounds ok to me, although it’s also a rate. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2010, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164/63 "2010-10-15T23:09:29Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > > [@pulykamell](#): > > > > There’s _gotta_ be an exception for that in the Chicago Manual of Style. I can’t imagine that style book advocating MPHs. I’ve never seen such a usage in print, ever. > > I checked, and I didn’t see anything specific. I suspect they just overlooked it. On the other hand, “Rotating at 500 RPMs” sounds ok to me, although it’s also a rate. Interesting. 500 RPMs does sound more acceptable than 50 MPHs, but it still sounds a little bit awkward to my ears. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2010, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164/64 "2010-10-15T23:53:45Z")
> [@pulykamell](#): > > > [@Colibri](#): > > > > My inclination would be to write 65 MPH, but because it’s a rate and thus a continuous variable. However, according to Chicago Style 65 MPHs would be correct. > > There’s _gotta_ be an exception for that in the Chicago Manual of Style. I can’t imagine that style book advocating MPHs. I’ve never seen such a usage in print, ever. > > Anyhow, I agree that RBIs is fine, and MPHs is weird, and it does have something to do with MPH being a rate, although I can’t quite put my finger on how to best explain the difference. MPH is an abbreviation of a rate, consisting of the number of miles traveled divided by the number of hours it took to travel them, stated as the number of miles traveled per single hour. If one travels 180 miles and takes three hours to do it, your rate of travel is 180/3 or 60 MPH – miles per hour. I think it would be indeclinable: “You travel 1000 miles. Calculate how long it would take you to do so at 75, 60, and 35 MPH.” Even though three different rates are being specified, if the abbreviation is read out, it will still be “miles per hour” the same as if it were only a single rate. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2010, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164/65 "2010-10-16T00:25:46Z")
> [@Monty](#): > > The Surgeon General of the United States is not a Vice Admiral; his rank is the equivalent (same pay grade). [( **PDF** ) is the official PHS blurb on ranks: > > [QUOTE=Page 32 of The Commissioned Officer’s Handbook] > The PHS Act establishes the formal designations of grade within the commissioned corps. However, it is appropriate to use the equivalent Navy ranks orally when referring to Corps officers. This also applies to most documents (abbreviations optional). The PHS system is used for documents having legal signifigance. The actual names of the grades are listed, along with the Navy equivalents, on Page 33 of said manual. Of special note is this comment in that table: > [@](#): > > [sup]a[/sup] The proper titles and abbreviations of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Surgeon General, and Deputy Surgeon General are always those of the Public Health Service. [/QUOTE] I’m not going to try to reopen your link again. I ended up having to reboot my computer. But I don’t see your point about how the Surgeon General is not a Vice Admiral. Regina Benjamin’s title is the Surgeon General of the United States and her rank is Vice Admiral [URL=“[United States Public Health Service Commissioned Corps - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Public_Health_Service_Commissioned_Corps)”]cite](]Here[/url). The same way that Michael Mullen’s title is Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and his rank is Admiral. The United States Public Health Service Commissioned Corps is a uniformed service just like the United States Navy and the United States Coast Guard are. And all three of these services have a rank of Vice Admiral within them. ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2010, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164/66 "2010-10-16T01:00:23Z")
> [@spark240](#): > > It’s not criminal. But I maintain that it’s nonsensical, and therefore inappropriate in formal writing, to pluralize a _numerical_ abbreviation. Would you write that you were driving at 65 MPHs? Do you mean 65 mile per hours? ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2010, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164/67 "2010-10-16T01:01:02Z")
> [@Polycarp](#): > > MPH is an abbreviation of a rate, consisting of the number of miles traveled divided by the number of hours it took to travel them, stated as the number of miles traveled per single hour. If one travels 180 miles and takes three hours to do it, your rate of travel is 180/3 or 60 MPH – miles per hour. I think it would be indeclinable: “You travel 1000 miles. Calculate how long it would take you to do so at 75, 60, and 35 MPH.” Even though three different rates are being specified, if the abbreviation is read out, it will still be “miles per hour” the same as if it were only a single rate. You wouldn’t write MPHs for the same reason you wouldn’t write 66 kgs or 42 ms or 88 Ks or 512 GBs; abbreviations for units don’t take an s, even though you _say_ “66 kilograms” or the like. For that matter, I would write 45 RPM even though I might well _say_ “forty-five arr-pee-ems” instead of “forty-five revolutions per minute.” ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2010, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164/68 "2010-10-16T01:16:19Z")
> [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](#): > > > [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > > > And here’s a bit of trivia: the Surgeon General of the United States is actually a Vice Admiral. > > True. The Master speaks: [Why does the U.S. surgeon general wear a uniform? - The Straight Dope](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1037/why-does-the-u-s-surgeon-general-wear-a-uniform) There’s nothing that says that he has to wear the same uniforms that the Navy guys do, other than tradition. He could decide that the Public Health Service uniforms are going to be throwbacks to 1775 if he so desired, complete with gold braid, breeches, stockings and shoes with buckles. It’s just convenience and tradition. But yeah, he holds the rank of Vice Admiral. ---
**Author:** ![Springtime\_for\_Spacers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Springtime\_for\_Spacers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Springtime_for_Spacers)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2010, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164/69 "2010-10-16T01:50:37Z")
> [@SmithCommaJohn](#): > > Oh, and if you ever want to come off like a pedantic dick, go into a Taco Bell and order up some Burritos Supreme. > > Or go to a Burger King and order two Whoppers Junior. “Burrito Supreme” is a name in it’s own right as well as a noun-adjective phrase. As such it follows the pluralisation for names : _There, are two Mary Annes in my class and three Billy Bobs in the football teamed and between them they consumed 19 Burrito Supremes befopre aschool yesterday._ as opposed to _There, are two Maries Anne in my class and three Billies Bob in the football team and between them they consumed 19 Burritos Supreme before school yesterday._ Incidentally is there really a Whopper Junior or is it a Junior Whopper? ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2010, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164/70 "2010-10-16T02:21:31Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > > [@Monty](#): > > > > The Surgeon General of the United States is not a Vice Admiral; his rank is the equivalent (same pay grade). [( **PDF** ) is the official PHS blurb on ranks: > > The actual names of the grades are listed, along with the Navy equivalents, on Page 33 of said manual. Of special note is this comment in that table: > > I’m not going to try to reopen your link again. I ended up having to reboot my computer. Following this board’s protocol, I clearly indicated it’s a PDF. Further, I quoted the relevant parts of the manual. > [@](#): > > But I don’t see your point about how the Surgeon General is not a Vice Admiral. Regina Benjamin’s title is the Surgeon General of the United States and her rank is Vice Admiral [URL=“[United States Public Health Service Commissioned Corps - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Public_Health_Service_Commissioned_Corps)”]cite](]Here[/url). The same way that Michael Mullen’s title is Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and his rank is Admiral. The link I provided is from the Public Health Service itself. I think I’ll go with that. Also, Michael Mullen’s rank is Admiral. Admiral Mullen’s position is Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The reason Mullen’s rank is Admiral is because the service he’s in has, by law, that rank instead of General for that paygrade. The Surgeon General’s rank is, again by law, Surgeon General. Kind of nifty, if you ask me. > [@](#): > > The United States Public Health Service Commissioned Corps is a uniformed service just like the United States Navy and the United States Coast Guard are. And all three of these services have a rank of Vice Admiral within them. Actually, that is not the case. As shown by the PHS Commissioned Officer’s Handbook (linked above), the actual rank of their officers are (Paygrade/PHS Grade): [ul][li]O-10/Assistant Secretary for Health[/li][li] **O-9/Surgeon General** [/li][li]O-8/Deputy Surgeon General[/li][li]O-7/Assistant Surgeon General[/li][li]O-6/Director[/li][li]O-5/Senior[/li][li]O-4/Full[/li][li]O-3/Senior Assistant[/li][li]O-2/Assistant[/li][li]O-1/Junior Assistant[/li][/ul] **Bolding** in the list above is mine. The table mentioned above also lists the _equivalent_ Navy grades, noting that these are _equivalents_ of the _actual_ PHS grades. While composing this reply, I missed the post above about there being nothing other than tradition requiring PHS COs to wear uniforms similar to the Navy’s. Actually, there are two things: law and regulation. [Here is yet another PDF link](http://dcp.psc.gov/PDF_docs/2631.pdf), this time to Part 2 of the Commissioned Corps Personnel Manual. No, the officer cannot legally do what **bump** suggests. For your edification, there are currently seven (7) Uniformed Services of the United States of America (the links below are not PDF): [ol][li][Army](http://www.army.mil/)[/li][li]Navy[/li][li][Marine Corps](http://www.marines.mil/Pages/Default.aspx)[/li][li]Air Force[/li][li][Coast Guard](http://www.uscg.mil/)[/li][li][Public Health Service Commissioned Corps](http://www.usphs.gov/)[/li][li][National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration Commissioned Officer Corps](http://www.noaacorps.noaa.gov/about/about.html)[/ol][/li] So, it is conventional to refer to USPH COs by their equivalent Navy grades while speaking and in certain documents. However, for legal documents the officers’ actual grades, the ones they do hold, with the PHS terminology, must be used. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2010, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164/71 "2010-10-16T02:42:22Z")
Can we all agree that it is idiotic to address as “general” a person holding an office of attorney general, surgeon general, etc.? I hate that. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2010, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164/72 "2010-10-16T02:47:21Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > Can we all agree that it is idiotic to address as “general” a person holding an office of attorney general, surgeon general, etc.? I hate that. Agreed. See post 46. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2010, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164/73 "2010-10-17T03:40:25Z")
> [@Monty](#): > > No, the officer cannot legally do what **bump** suggests. You’re kind of splitting hairs. It comes down to the fact that the Surgeon General isn’t the highest ranking commissioned officer in the PHS. The Chiefs of Staff of the Army, Navy and Air Force, as well as the Commandant of the Marine Corps have pretty much absolute authority to change the uniforms of their services- the Assistant Secretary for Health likely has the same latitude. Again, the only reason they use naval uniforms is tradition. All those regulations and stuff are set by the senior officers, just like all the other uniformed services. About the only things I can think of that are probably standardized by statute are rank insignia, and pay grades. Titles, uniforms, etc.. are almost certainly up to the senior leadership of the services in question. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2010, 5:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164/74 "2010-10-17T05:07:03Z")
You asserted that “the officer,” evidently meaning any ol’ PHS Commissioned Corps officer, could do whatever he wants regarding uniform. That is not the case. The PHS CO Manual to which I linked above lays out the statutory authority for the uniform policies. That’s not splitting hairs. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2010, 6:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164/75 "2010-10-17T06:35:59Z")
Forgot something. You should be aware that the PHS Act is law, not something the Surgeon General does on his own. Let me repeat a quote: > [@](#): > > _Originally Posted by **Page 32 of The Commissioned Officer’s Handbook** _ > The PHS Act establishes the formal designations of grade within the commissioned corps. You should also be aware that the [10 USC CHAPTER 43](http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/10C43.txt) is law, not something the service chiefs do on their own: ```auto Sec. 741. Rank: commissioned officers of the armed forces -STATUTE- (a) Among the grades listed below, the grades of general and admiral are equivalent and are senior to other grades and the grades of second lieutenant and ensign are equivalent and are junior to other grades. Intermediate grades rank in the order listed as follows: Army, Air Force, and Navy and Coast Guard Marine Corps -------------------------------------------------------------------- General Admiral. Lieutenant general Vice admiral. Major general Rear admiral. Brigadier general Rear admiral (lower half). Colonel Captain. Lieutenant colonel Commander. Major Lieutenant commander. Captain Lieutenant. First lieutenant Lieutenant (junior grade). Second lieutenant Ensign. ``` I’m not hairsplitting. I’m stating facts. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2010, 6:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164/76 "2010-10-17T06:49:14Z")
For what it’s worth, I’ve emailed the USPHSCC, asking them to clarify the issue of ranks. I’ll post their response here when and if I receive one. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2010, 7:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164/77 "2010-10-17T07:05:47Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > > [@spark240](#): > > > > Would you write that you were driving at 65 MPHs? > > My inclination would be to write 65 MPH, but because it’s a rate and thus a continuous variable. However, according to Chicago Style 65 MPHs would be correct. Well, I agree with your inclination. And I’m inclined to apply a similar logic to baseball statistics. We may speak casually of “three RBIs for Slugger in the game,” but when those three events are compiled into a statistic, it seems another matter. (Strictly speaking, RBI is a counting stat, not a rate, but like other counting stats can generate rate stats.)\* > [@Colibri](#): > > As in examples given above, you would say “15 POWs,” not “15 POW,” and “100 MREs,” not “100 MRE.” I would be thinking of those as _things_, not figures. Formal military accounts might differ. > [@kunilou](#): > > Do you mean 65 mile per hours? No. - Not that RBI and its derivatives are particularly useful stats. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2010, 9:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164/78 "2010-10-17T09:38:13Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > For what it’s worth, I’ve emailed the USPHSCC, asking them to clarify the issue of ranks. I’ll post their response here when and if I receive one. What’s to clarify? I posted facts directly from the USPH. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2010, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164/79 "2010-10-17T16:33:30Z")
> [@Monty](#): > > > [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > > > For what it’s worth, I’ve emailed the USPHSCC, asking them to clarify the issue of ranks. I’ll post their response here when and if I receive one. > > What’s to clarify? I posted facts directly from the USPH. I question your interpretation of what was written. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2010, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164/80 "2010-10-17T17:02:33Z")
> [@spark240](#): > > Well, I agree with your inclination. And I’m inclined to apply a similar logic to baseball statistics. We may speak casually of “three RBIs for Slugger in the game,” but when those three events are compiled into a statistic, it seems another matter. (Strictly speaking, RBI is a counting stat, not a rate, but like other counting stats can generate rate stats.)\* I fail to see any logic in this at all; in fact the logic is directly the reverse. “RBI” itself is simply a count stat; it has no rate component, unlike BA or ERA. It is impossible to have a fraction of an RBI, while it is possible to be going at 11.5 MPH or at 33 1/3 RPM. If you generate a rate stat, such as RBI per at bat, then the stat you are talking about is no longer RBI. [QUOTE=spark240] I would be thinking of those as things, not figures. Formal military accounts might differ. [/QUOTE] I don’t know what this means with respect to the discussion. Which would you write, “150 POW” or “150 POWs”? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-attorneys-general-etc/557164.md?page=5)