Technically you're wrong.
"Maths are" vs "Math is" - half a sandwich again?
- Thread starter SourChipmunk
- Start date
Technically you're wrong.
Mathematics is shortened, "ematic" is missed out, and replaced with an apostrophe.
It's a contraction.
The point he's making is that it's a contraction.
It's a grey area though. I think "maths" is more acceptable as a word on its own.
Last edited:
"Math" is an Americanism, so best avoided.
"Maths" is a legitimate contraction of "mathematics", so "Maths is" is grammatically correct. No apostrophe required.
"Math's" is not a legitimate contraction, unless you are using it to indicate possession (though it would be difficult to think of a context in which this could be done legitimately).
"Maths" is a legitimate contraction of "mathematics", so "Maths is" is grammatically correct. No apostrophe required.
"Math's" is not a legitimate contraction, unless you are using it to indicate possession (though it would be difficult to think of a context in which this could be done legitimately).
CD and DVD are both examples of initialism, they aren't the same.
You're shortening a word by removing letters in the middle, ergo you need an apostrophe, to make the omission, for example when you miss out the "o" in not:
havn't
Why is "math's" not a legitimate contraction? It seems pretty straight forward to me.
Last edited:
It only denotes missing letters when a word is being abbreviated. This does not apply to accepted contractions.
For example, the word "bus" is a contraction of "omnibus", and was originally written as "'bus" (note the preceding apostrophe). We don't write it that way now, because "bus" has become a legitimate word in its own right, so the apostrophe is redundant.
The same is true of other contractions, such as "photo" (a contraction of "photograph"). Thus, "photos" correctly denotes a plurality of photographs, while "photo's" does not.
Who cares.
No, we're not.
American English <> British English. Two separate countries where English evolved.. separately. Over centuries.
Do today's Brits speak the same English that was spoken in Shakespeare's time?
well the Americans are known for being crap at English
No, we're not.
American English <> British English. Two separate countries where English evolved.. separately. Over centuries.
Do today's Brits speak the same English that was spoken in Shakespeare's time?
The rule doesn't apply here because there would be a confusion over ownership.
For instance, you would say "fire regs" and not "fire reg's", and you would say CDs and not CD's unless you were talking in the possessive. The reason for this is simple:
- I have lots of CDs.
- That box is the CD's.
See?
And yet I constantly see people writing "CD's" and "DVD's" when they mean a plural of CDs and DVDs!
Please see my other post. "Maths" is no longer a mere abbreviation; it is a contraction, yet still a separate word in its own right.
Do you use an apostrophe for the word "bus"?
Oh right, I see what you're saying, cheers for the explanation. "Maths" it is then.
Who cares.
No, we're not.
American English <> British English. Two separate countries where English evolved.. separately. Over centuries.
Do today's Brits speak the same English that was spoken in Shakespeare's time?
Aye, verily.
The language is called English. That means that English people are the ones who get to decide what's correct and what's not.
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 9,515
- Location
- The Motor City
Me. I'm trying to learn here.
Doe'st thou have doubt? Can'st thou not see the breakage that is occuring by thee disbelief? We are merely one, trying to unite, to rejoice in freedom and reject the slavery that is amongst us! Be free! I beg you! Withdraw from these thy times and knowest what is truest to thyself!
Skyfall: I'm so much better with mustard.
Last edited:
Learn what? Nobody on here will give you an unbiased answer ; We have people posting that "mathematics" is plural.