From:	"Weiqi Gao" <weiqigao AT crl DOT com>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: dos data segment
Date:	21 Dec 1996 03:41:32 GMT
Organization:	CRL Dialup Internet Access
Lines:	23
Message-ID:	<01bbeef0$c1497880$0f0171a5@weiqigao>
References:	<NEWTNews DOT 850242688 DOT 13174 DOT mwallace AT celsius-tul> <32B9FB24 DOT 2696 AT cam DOT org> <32BA5130 DOT 6E3E AT cs DOT com> <59e5b8$k26 AT star DOT cs DOT vu DOT nl>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	crl2.crl.com
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

Ruiter de M <mdruiter AT cs DOT vu DOT nl> wrote in article
<59e5b8$k26 AT star DOT cs DOT vu DOT nl>...

> [earlier discussion about plura;ity of "data"]
> Yes. And all of this is very off-topic. Sorry for joining the discussion
here.

From The Dictionary of Modern English Usage by H.W. Fowler (you can guess
that I'm not a native English speaker, why else would anyone keep such a
dictionary):

\bold{data} is a latin plural (\italics{The d. are}, not \italics{is,
insufficient.} / \italics{What are the d.?} / \italics{We have no d.}); the
singular, relatively rare, is \italics{datum}; \italics{one of the data} is
commoner than \italics{a datum}; but \italics{datum-line}, is used for a
line taken as a basis.  Latin plurals sometimes become singular English
words (e.g. \italics{agenda, stanima}) and \italics{data} is often so
treated in the U.S.; in Britain this is still considered a solecism, though
it may occationally appear.

-- 
Weiqi Gao
weiqigao AT crl DOT com

- Raw text -