The American Printer: A Manual of Typography: Containing practical directions for managing all departments of a printing office, as well as complete instructions for apprentices; with several useful tables, numerous schemes for imposing forms in every variety, hints to authors, etc.MacKellar, Thomas
History
The American Printer: A Manual of Typography: Containing practical directions for managing all departments of a printing office, as well as complete instructions for apprentices; with several useful tables, numerous schemes for imposing forms in every variety, hints to authors, etc.
MacKellar, Thomas
Graphic design (Typography); Printing -- United States -- Handbooks, manuals, etc.; Printing industry -- United States
It is not uncommon with some persons to omit the _s_ after the apostrophe
in the possessive case of nouns, if the name itself ends in _s_; as,
“_James’_ book,” “_Barnes’_ Notes.” But this is incorrect; for if we ask,
Whose book? we should directly answer, _James’s_. The only case when the
_s_ can be judiciously omitted, and this solely to avoid the too hissing
sound of so many _s_’s in succession, is when the first word ends with
the sound of _s_ in its last two syllables, and the next word begins with
_s_; as in _Misses’_ spectacles, _righteousness’_ sake, _conscience’_
sake.
_Formation of the Plurals of Words compounded of a Noun and an Adjective._
Adjectives have no plural number. Therefore, in a word compounded of a
noun and an adjective, the _s_ denoting the plural number is attached to
the end of the noun, as follows:—
Governor-general Governors-general.
Attorney-general Attorneys-general.
Court-martial Courts-martial.
But where the adjective is taken substantively, the mark of the
plural will properly follow it. For example: _Brigadier-generals_,
_major-generals_, _lieutenant-generals_.
Words compounded of a noun and the adjective _full_ form their plurals
thus: _spoonfuls_, _cupfuls_, _bucketfuls_, _handfuls_, _mouthfuls_.
_Pointing of Numbers, Weights, Measures, &c._
No comma should be placed between the constituent parts of the same
number, however long it may be. Thus, we say, “One million one hundred
thousand five hundred and twenty-one,” without any interpunction. The
reason is, that there is no more than _one_ numerical aggregate intended,
or but _one_ complex notion; and, consequently, no separation of parts
or members can take place. The same reasoning holds good as respects
_values_, _weights_, &c. For instance, when we say, “Six dollars and
ten cents,” we merely mean that aggregate amount, but not necessarily
any one of the coins indicated. If we did so intend, then two commas
should be introduced,—one after “dollars,” and the other after “cents.”
In like manner we should act with such sentences as, “Five tons three
hundredweight two quarters and fifteen pounds;” or, “Ten acres four roods
and twenty-seven perches;” and for the same reason: no division of parts
is intended, but merely one aggregate amount.
When figures are used to express amounts, a comma should not be inserted
to cut off the tens unless the sum requires five figures: _e.g._ $10,600,
20,000 men, &c. In column matter this rule will not apply.
_Derivation of English Words._
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account