Help Me Help Another Boaltie See the Light
Two threads below have generated a "spirited" email exchange, in which only one party can prevail.
Please, vindicate me:
1. "Her California [ . . . ] was suspended after she was caught talking on the phone while driving."
a) driver license
b) drivers license
c) driver's license
d) drivers' license
2. "On top of everything else, the whiners demanded [ . . . ] to the tune of $7-10 million."
a) attorney fees
b) attorneys fees
c) attorney's fees
d) attorneys' fees
(Apologies to the extent this reads like a bar question. But at least this time the answer is listed.)
Labels: Grammar Snarks
posted by Patrick Bageant at 8:40 AM
28 Comments:
c, a
c, d.
Patrick, if you look at your DMV issued California Driver License, you will see it says California Driver License. The second one is trickier, albeit inconsistent with the first even. I prefer attorney's fees or attorneys' fees depending on the number of attorney(s). But I can also see how someone would use attorney as an adjective (like "Driver" above).
C? How the hell does the possessive make sense? The driver's license? License for what? Fishing?
I don't anything the California DMV says as authoritative. You should see the "correct" answers to questions in the written test for a motorcycle endorsement.
Because I prefer a clean kill, I am reluctant to tip my hand early. But here goes anyway:
"Driver's licenses" is appropriate in contexts similar to, "Driver's licenses are issued by the state." "Drivers' licenses" is appropriate in contexts like, "All the drivers' licenses were examined at the scene of the accident." In the latter case, which is unusual, there's reason to refer to more than one driver, not just more than one license.
"Attorney fees," notwithstanding the number of attorneys (or number of fees) that may be involved, is standard. "Attorney's fees," and "Attorneys' fees," are hypercorrection.
But then, my client's Oakland Residential Tenancy Agreement, which currently sits in front of me, says "attorneys fees." So there's that...
Enjoy your motorcyclist's endorsement. What else? "Upon closer examination, the driver's license to kill was in perfect order." [Rolls eyes]. It's a driver license. Deal with it.
Are you sure it isn't a driving licence?
or a fisher licence?
As sure as it's not a fisher's license.
Armen is some completely, totally wrong here -- and it happens so rarely -- that this is kind of enjoyable.
When the noun describes someone who does an activity, a possessive plural is used.
"Can you operate that forklift?" "Yes I have an operator's license" (not an operator license).
"Is it OK for James Bond to kill that guy?" "Yes, he has a killer's license" (not a killer license).
When the noun is an animate object or a gerund, the possessive is not used (fishing license, motorcycle license, liquor license).
The California DMV is not, and never has been, correct about anything, ever.
James Bond does not have a killer's license. He has a license to kill. Everyone knows that!
Which reminds me - why don't we just make it a license to drive and call the whole thing off?
1. a
2. a, c, or d (according to black's)
If you are referring to the actual plastic rectangle and legal license that basically comes with it - it is a "Driver License." It doesn't matter whether the DMV is correct or incorrect when it comes to grammar, they named it (or someone up there decided to name it) the "Driver License" and not the "Driver's License."
Basically, correct versions would be as follows:
Her driver license was suspended.
This driver's license was suspended.
Those drivers' licenses were suspended.
I think EW provided the most persuasive analysis of what it should be here. Besides, just because California does it, doesn't make it right. (That is, unless you're a Californian...)
Varty,
A Berkeley street sign was recently discovered to read, "Califorina Street."
True or false: It doesn't matter whether the City of Berkeley is correct or incorrect when it comes to spelling, they named it (or someone up there decided to name it) "Califorina Street" and not "California Street."
Patrick, true...typos happen. But the street is officially named California Street, not Califorina street despite a very very stupid typo error in one street sign. But that's one out of who knows how many California Street street signs that actually read California Street.
However, when it comes to the DMV and the driver license, they are pretty consistent. Everywhere that I have ever seen it referred to officially (including ALL the physical CA licenses and the website) it has always been Driver License.
So basically, if the brilliant city of Berkeley (note the sarcasm) decided to actually name the street Califorina Street, then the one sign that read California street would be the typo and the incorrect version, regardless of how much it made us Californians cringe.
This comment has been removed by the author.
My question is: who died and made California the authority on the driver license versus drivers license versus driver's license question?
And my bigger question is: can we use the commerce clause to enforce the correct usage of 'driver's license' across the country? Where's J*hn Y*o when you need him?
I'm talking about what the damn thing is (i.e., a driver's license) not what some nitwit at the DMV "decided" to say it is. The fact that the nitwit's version is plastered across the state and all over the Internets doesn’t make him right. It just pisses me off.
Exhibit two: the back of your CA license reads, "This License is issued as a license to drive a motor vehicle . . . " Not, "This License is issued as a license to Driver."
It's a license to drive a motor vehicle. It is issued to a driver. It is a driver's license.
oh and as to 11:05: true, just because CA does it, doesn't make it right everywhere - but it does make it right in CA. plus, we've got more bounce in california
so all my previous comments come with a caveat - I am only referring to the official title for the license in the state of California and nowhere else.
and patrick, if you're so adamant and annoyed as to it being one particular way, why even ask the question and put choice A as one of the options. I'm not saying what the government or some "nitwit" acting for the government does is the best or most correct way to do something, but sometimes officially, it is what it is.
Don’t believe everything you read, especially if it was published by the state of California. Or even Califorina. Just because it says, "Driver License" doesn't make it so.
Anyway, I'll grant that "Driver License" is marginally more palatable than "Drivers' License," which suggests that somehow we all share the same document. "Driver License" is harmless nonsense. "Drivers' License" is an active misrepresentation.
Listen Patrick's, why don't you take your driver's license and mosey on over to Jupiter's.
amusingly enough, a short research project (what can I say, work's been a bit slow lately) with probably a very biased sample, reveals a toss up between "Driver's License" and "Driver License" as the preferred choice among states.
So CA and NY both use Driver Licenses.
Whereas, Patrick, your fair state of Idaho and my former surrogate state Pennsylvania prefer Driver's License.
I was amused and thought I'd share.
In Minnesota, you get a Drivers License. It's because we often have multiple people driving one vehicle.
In Minnesota thirty-somethings drive Buick LeSabres. And no one speeds. Ever.
That is all approximately correct, too.
Except people driving SUVs in the snow. They speed all the time.
What's the problem? Her driver (the one she uses in California) was caught talking on the phone... so the driver's license was suspended.
Also... googlefight:
http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=driver%27s+license&word2=driver+license
Post a Comment
<< Home