spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [spf-discuss] Re: RFC 4408 erratas

2006-05-26 14:28:10
Constantine A. Murenin writes:
This is nonsense. 'Errata' is plural, and even Webster online
dictionary says so. Most other dictionaries specifically list it as
plural. Spelling and grammar checkers mark it as plural.

Webster online says, and I quote, "2 entries found for errata".  The
entries are labeled "errata" and "erratum".

Click on the the "errata" entry and it says the the *Etymology* is the
Latin plural of erratum, but the definition is singular:
     ": a list of corrigenda; also : a page bearing such a list"

Click on the "erratum" entry and it says the plural of erratum is
errata.

Search Webster online for "erratas" and it returns the singular entry
for errata.  Search for "erratums" and it says "The word you've
entered isn't in the dictionary."  In other words, "erratas" is in the
dictionary, as the plural of the singular meaning of errata.

Overall:

    erratum [singular] - a (meaning one) corrigendum
    errata [plural] - plural of erratum, multiple corrigenda

    errata [singular] - a (meaning one) list of corrigenda
    erratas [plural] - plural of errata, mutiple lists of corrigenda

My dictionary says this, Webster online says this, and it's how I've
heard "errata" used for decades.

--
Dick St.Peters, stpeters(_at_)NetHeaven(_dot_)com 

-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your 
subscription, 
please go to 
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>