calling those lovely CL grammar police

Alwaysneil said:

I would hardly ever use italics other than in a quote. In a quote such as Luzon said 'I'm pissed' if I could get my phone to italicise the words in the inverted commas I would.

I would only capitalise pre-defined terms or initials. So I might say Charlton Athletic Football Club (CAFC) if people didn't already know.

I hate random capitalisation which my American colleagues seem to like especially in headings.

The Most Important Heading in the World.

Grrrr

Agree with earlier comments though, whatever you decide, be consistent.

I find it odd that I agree with you entirely about when to use capitals. BUT never follow my own rules for my music collection when I like each word in a song title or band name to start with a capital - even the conjunctions. In my view the song titles, etc just look better that way. I wonder why I do that?

I wouldn't say i had a Bad education but when i left Skool, i was still on Janet and John Book 2. With the help of the wonderful Grammar police on CL, i now say, "would've" instead of "Would of". also should've, instead of should of.
The class of 13 year olds to whom i teach, have reaped the rewards of this improvement.
Instead of feeling belittled and shamed by the correction; feel honoured
that this free educational advice is available by Pedo pedants willing to help the less fortunate.

Ha - just looked at some of the other headlines.

'man talks entirely in snatch quotes as he thinks he is hard'

It's (apostrophe signifies abbreviation, not possessive)
Widdows's - simply add possessive apostrophe in the normal way.


I think

The_President said:

Another one for you..... surrounding ownership...

'Its Fred Widdows's problem' ...or is it...'Its Fred Widdows problem' or is it 'it's Fred Widdows problem' etc..

Widdows'

rina said:

PeterGage said:

My formal education (many years ago) was basic, to say the least! I therefore have a grammar question.

One hears the word "firstly" so often these days, particularly on TV. Is this correct grammar? I would have thought that as nothing precedes "first", it cannot have a "ly" tagged on the end of the word. For me, with my limited grammatical skills, I would have thought that "first", "secondly", "thirdly" is correct grammar.

Can somebody advise please. Thanks.

both are correct. English grammar isn't either/or, there's often more than 1 correct answer

You can use firstly, or you can use first. But, stylistically, if you start with firstly, you should proceed with secondly; if you start with first, then go with second, third, etc

Chizz said:

rina said:

PeterGage said:

My formal education (many years ago) was basic, to say the least! I therefore have a grammar question.

One hears the word "firstly" so often these days, particularly on TV. Is this correct grammar? I would have thought that as nothing precedes "first", it cannot have a "ly" tagged on the end of the word. For me, with my limited grammatical skills, I would have thought that "first", "secondly", "thirdly" is correct grammar.

Can somebody advise please. Thanks.

both are correct. English grammar isn't either/or, there's often more than 1 correct answer

You can use firstly, or you can use first. But, stylistically, if you start with firstly, you should proceed with secondly; if you start with first, then go with second, third, etc

First, thanks rina, and secondly thanks Chizz -:)

Then why is St James's Park different from that?

(it may just be a vagary of the language, I don't know)