
The answer appears to be that there is no definitive answer. Some common acronyms such as a.m. and p.m., or A.D. and B.C. are commonly, but not invariably, written with full stops, as is G.I. and C.D.. Whereas BBC and NATO are usually written without. O.K. is apparently OK written either way.
Plurals present another difficulty. Should it be C.D.'s or CDs? Once again there seems to be no definitive answer. Perhaps it's simply a matter of preference? The recent explosive growth in the use of abbreviations and acronyms due to the widespread adoption of Text Speak has led to innumerable new examples, almost entirely without the full stop or apostrophe. Is this bad grammar, or progress? Probably neither, is Barnaby's conclusion, simply fashion.

The following verse was penned by BW a few years back when he also found himself pondering acronyms of the two, three, four and even five letter kind. He hopes that even if the verse doesn't make you LOL, it might at least make you smile.

I’m more MFI than Amalfi.
I’m more BHS than Biarritz .
I’m more M and S than Mauritius .
I’m more C and A than Cadiz .
I’m more HGV than Ferrari.
I’m more VPL than lace thong.
I’m more G and T than Campari.
I’m more R and B than folk song.
I’m not AOP nor yet YUPPIE,
Neither DINKY nor NIMBY nor bum.
I’m an ‘A’ OK sort of chappie.
A VGSOH sort of chum.
I’m more B and B than the Hilton.
I’m more H2O than old port.
I’m more OTT with a kilt on.
I’m more BBC than Sky Sport.
I’m more G and S than Puccini.
I’m more DIY than bespoke.
I’m more KFC than linguini.
Yes, … I’m an ‘A’ OK
kind of bloke.
I’m not RIP yet, nor baby,
And I’m not as PC as I should.
I could do with more TLC maybe.
(Make it ASAP if you could).
No comments:
Post a Comment