Newsgroup: it.cultura.linguistica.inglese
Titolo: PDA

What does PDA stand for in this sentence?
| random note about England:
| Sarah and i noticed this in London, and it is true here as well.
| PDA's seem to not be a big deal at all. Couples just makeout
| wherever, in the tube, at carafax tower, anywhere and everywhere.
| Also, you see guys touching girls in lots of places. I don't see
| nearly this much PDA stuff in the USA at all. just a cultural note.
| nudity is not a big deal at all here. It's just somehting people
| are open about, which is cool.
http://www.travelblog.org/Europe/United-Kingdom/England/Oxford/blog-149.html
[some time later...]
Ok, I've found PDA on an acronym search engine. 
It stands for "Public Display of Affection".
What do you think of the above remark about England anyway? :)
 
What is a "carafax tower", by the way?
And what about "PDA's", the apostrophe before the plural "s" in
acronyms?

 acronyms?
Sbagliato.
-- 
Xakero

 Dovrebbe essere Carafax con la C maiuscolo. È un edificio.
...e anche con la T maiusucolo: Carafax Tower. Troppa gente è troppo pigro
di premere quel tasto "Shift".
-- 
Xakero



I agree, the apostrophe is an error, but there are certain journals, The
New York Times for one, that follow an old convention of using periods with
many of their acronyms, and also the apostrophe for the plural: P.D.A.'s,
for example, which I find egregreously wrong.
They also use apostrophes in dates, such as "in the 1920's..." which I
can't stand either.
-- 
If you feel the need to e-mail me, un-not my address first.



I know, I misspelled "egregiously" -- how embarrassing is *that*? :(


 What is a "carafax tower", by the way?
Never heard of it.
They probably mean the "Carfax Tower" in Oxford.
-- 
Mary

 It stands for "Public Display of Affection".
It could also stand for personal digital assistant depending on how close
they are

they are
ROTFL
Sebastiano

> What is a "carafax tower", by the way?
He probably meant Oxford's Carfax Tower.

 > can't stand either.
So... "in the 1920's" (50's, 80's, etc...) has *always* been wrong? Gosh....
:-(
1920s, 50s, etc... would be better?

 1920s, 50s, etc... would be better?
(In my opinion) better, but I wouldn't go so far as to say it's "wrong",
and there are those "experts" who would say it's right. It's a matter of
style. The New York Times has adopted a style that I feel is unnecessary
(the periods in the acronym) and slightly out of context (the apostrophe,
representing the "missing letters" of the acronym.)
The Chicago Manual of Style, for example, says that the plural of acronyms
is formed by adding 's', but they don't include the periods: PDAs, CODs,
IOUs, YMCAs, etc. They also say that if "an abbreviation" (not an acronym)
has more than one period, then apostrophe-s should be added: M.D.'s,
Ph.D.'s. (I wouldn't use the periods here either, however -- too much
punctuation to look at -- so even here I would write MDs, PhDs, etc.
In the case of "the 50s" "the 80s" etc., if you think about it, why is
there an apostrophe? There are no missing letters; it's not a possessive.
My style. My convention. One of several. Take your pick of whichever seems
the neatest, the most efficient, or whatever it is you're looking for in
your writing.


 there an apostrophe? There are no missing letters; it's not a possessive.
Perhaps the "ie" group is missing and is represented by an apostrophe
(?)
50 = fifty 
the 50's = the Fift(ie)s 

 for example, which I find egregreously wrong.
Recently I've written "r's" (the letter). How would you write it, without
capitalizing the "r" (Rs)?
Bye, FB
-- 
Mrs. Palmer, in her way, was equally angry. 'She was determined to drop his
acquaintance immediately, and she was very thankful that she had never been
acquainted with him at all'. (Jane Austen)

 capitalizing the "r" (Rs)?
Like this:
The word "embarrassing" has one "r" rapidly followed by another "r".
And if you need, say 42 of them: one "r" rapidly followed by 41 more.
</end joke time>
So okay, in this case, for clarity, the most efficient and intelligible way
to write it would be the way you have. Two "r's", for example.
But I would use "two Rs" instead because the apostrophe inherently tells me
either that it's an abbreviation (which it isn't) or a possessive (also not
true.) It doesn't make sense, however, to stick to a "rule" that only makes
the writing more difficult to read, and that's one reason we have
exceptions.
 Sometimes on sidewalk signs I see things like:
Hot Dogs
Hamburgers
Egg's
and I know they mean "Eggs" but in my wacky little mind I can't help but
wonder what it is they have that belongs to someone apparently named "Egg".
And I also wonder why they don't have something belonging to "Hot Dog" (Hot
Dog's) or "Hamburger" (Hamburger's). Just my inquiring mind.
