• From BBC site

    From alexander koryagin@2:5020/400 to All on Wed Jun 13 19:41:34 2018
    From: alexander koryagin <koryagin@newmail.ru>

    In the article "The lasting allure of the flying saucer",
    by Jon Kelly, BBC News Magazine, I've read this passage:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-27796697
    -----Beginning of the citation-----
    Thus flying saucers became a somewhat kitsch symbol of the more
    whimsical end of the space age.

    But the notion of floating disc-shaped aircraft wasn't considered
    fanciful by governments and militaries around the world. The new LDSD is
    far from the first attempt by earthlings to construct a flying saucer-
    like aircraft.

    For instance, German engineer Georg Klein told the CIA he worked on a
    Nazi flying saucer for the Luftwaffe under designers Rudolf Schriever
    and Richard Miethe - a claim which prompted the Americans to study the possibility of creating one of their own.
    -----The end of the citation-----

    1. in the second paragraph: "But the notion of floating disc-shaped
    aircraft wasn't considered fanciful by governments and militaries around
    the world."

    Why the author has not put "a" before "floating disc-shaped aircraft"?

    2. in the third paragraph: Why not _a_ German engineer Georg Klein?
    --- ifmail v.2.15dev5.4
    * Origin: NPO RUSnet InterNetNews site (2:5020/400)
  • From alexander koryagin@2:5020/400 to mark lewis on Thu Jun 14 18:21:10 2018
    From: alexander koryagin <koryagin@newmail.ru>

    Hi, mark lewis!
    I read your message from 13.06.2014 14:31
    about From BBC site.

    ak>> 1. in the second paragraph: "But the notion of floating
    ak>> disc-shaped aircraft wasn't considered fanciful by
    ak>> governments and militaries around the world."
    ml>
    ak>> Why the author has not put "a" before "floating disc-shaped
    ak>> aircraft"?
    ml>
    ml> "aircraft", in that context, is plural...
    ml>
    ml> "aircraft" is like "deer" where it is both singular and
    ml> plural... the context used tells which one is being used...
    ml>
    ml> singular: i saw an aircraft.
    ml> plural : i saw some aircraft.
    ml> singular: we saw a unique aircraft at the airshow.
    ml> plural : we saw a lot of aircraft at the airshow.
    ml> singular: that aircraft has a propellor.
    ml> plural : most aircraft flying today have jet engines.

    I was so sure that on this earth there are "aircrafts" that it didn't
    occur to me to look into the dictionary. ;-)

    I also found a discussion on this subject: http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/46824/why-does-the-incorrect-plural-aircrafts-seem-to-be-occurring-more-often

    ak>> 2. in the third paragraph: Why not _a_ German engineer
    ak>> Georg Klein?
    ml>
    ml> occupation title? not sure but either would work... however,
    ml> commas would have ??to be added...
    ml>
    ml> [...] a German engineer, Georg Klein, told the [...]

    I thought the noun "engineer" is always used with an article when we
    speak of one person. I don't mind that both variants are correct, but
    I'd prefer to hear an explanation or a rule. ;)

    Bye, mark!
    Alexander Koryagin
    fido7.english-tutor 2014
    --- ifmail v.2.15dev5.4
    * Origin: NPO RUSnet InterNetNews site (2:5020/400)
  • From Roy Witt@1:387/22 to Ardith Hinton on Mon Jun 25 08:36:44 2018
    Greetings Ardith!

    Hi, Mark! Recently you wrote in a message to alexander koryagin:

    1. in the second paragraph: "But the notion of floating
    disc-shaped aircraft wasn't considered fanciful by
    governments and militaries around the world."

    Why the author has not put "a" before "floating disc-
    shaped aircraft"?

    "aircraft", in that context, is plural...

    "aircraft" is like "deer" where it is both singular and
    plural... the context used tells which one is being used...

    Agreed.... :-)

    Any agreement should be based on the previous context to the above. If the author was talking about a fleet of that type of craft, then the 'a' isn't requiredd. If not, then the 'a' should be there. Not having read it, I'd
    tend toward the 'a' being there.

    2. in the third paragraph: Why not _a_ German engineer
    Georg Klein?

    occupation title? not sure but either would work...
    however, commas would have to be added...

    [...] a German engineer, Georg Klein, told the [...]


    Yes. Or "Georg Klein, a German engineer, told the [...]".


    Those who want more information about the use of the comma
    in such situations can look up "restrictive" and "non-restrictive" punctuation.

    In the first example, "German engineer Georg Klein" is restrictive because (theoretically at least) only one person fits
    both descriptors.

    The other two examples are non-restrictive because the
    second part simply adds information... which may or may not be
    necessary depending on how much the reader wants to know & where s/he lives.


    Another example, in the same vein as your "occupation(al) title?": Chief Dan George. I'm using his name as we saw & heard it
    in the local news. This appears to be an occupational title. But journalists often use much the same format in other circumstances as well... e.g. "convicted killer XXX", or "Hollywood hopeful YYY". Re sticking others in pigeonholes I prefer to limit myself to things
    like "our upstairs neighbour
    ZZZ"... [chuckle].




    --- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+
    * Origin: Wits' End, Vancouver CANADA (1:153/716)

    Have a day!

    R\%/itt - K5RXT

    --- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-31012
    --- D'Bridge 3.99
    * Origin: South-Texas Area Hub - Gulf Coast Backbone (1:387/22)