Singulars and plurals: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

Singulars and plurals (view source)

Revision as of 11:05, 18 October 2023

1,483 bytes added , 18 October 2023

m

Amwelladmin moved page Singular to Singulars and plurals

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,927

edits

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{pe}}To what end the forensic remark “All references to the singular [[shall]] include the [[plural]], and vice versa”?
+{{a|construction|
+{{image|Sausage|jpg|A (singular) sausage, yesterday}}}}''A roadside cafe, 1983. '''Bad News''' guitarist Den approaches the counter with his tray.''
+:'''Cashier''': Two pounds and five pence, please, love.
+:'''Den''': Two quid?
+:'''Cashier''': That’s right, love. Two pounds and five pence.
+:'''Den''': Two quid for one bloody sausage?
+:'''Cashier''': It was clearly marked, love. “Sausage, beans and chips: two pounds and five pence.”
+:'''Den''': It says “sausa''ges''” up there, not just one sausage! Look, it says “sausa''ges''”! Where’s my other sausage, then?
+::—''Comic Strip Presents: The Bad News Tour (1983)''
-To your correspondent, none at all. This is throat-clearing, pointless text which, once in, benefits from the loving embrace of the [[anal paradox]], but fulfils no purpose whatsoever. No lawyer will ever object to it, but — and because — it plays no role in the legal meaning of the contract whatsoever. Can you imagine your learned counsel, {{jerrold}} standing up in court and learnedly submitted, to {{cocklecarrot}}:
-{{court scene|II|iv|stares morosely at his brogues, silently cursing the wasted shoe-polish in those nasty little holes|rises briskly, causing his chair to scrape flatulently on the parquet floor. {{cocklecarrot}} raises an eyebrow, and Sir Jerrold smiles thinly.}}
+To what end the forensic remark “All references to the singular [[shall]] include the [[plural]], and vice versa”? What legal benefit[[(s)]] accrue[[(s)]] by interposing parentheses on either side of a plural-denoting “s”?
-:'''Sir Jerrold''': M’Lud, the defendant acknowledges that it was obliged to comply with the plaintiff’s procedures — it says exactly that in clause 93.5(c)(iii)(G) of the [[indenture]], it cannot be denied — but the vital point is this: the plaintiff only had ''one'' procedure. Its operations manager, Mr Strumpet, conceded as much in cross examination this morning. So my respectful submission, M'Lud, is that nowhere in this contract — nowhere — does it require the defendant to comply with a ''single'' procedure. And for this authority I respectfully submit —” ''here Sir Jerrold looks about wildly at his junior, Master Contrario, who looks back at him blankly.'' “— ah, as authority for this well established principle of English, ah, law —”  ''here Sir Jerrold discreetly but violently jams the heel of his brogue into his junior’s shin.<br>
+To your correspondent, none. It is a whoreson zed; an unnecessary letter. This is throat-clearing text which, once in, benefits from the loving embrace of the [[anal paradox]], but serves no purpose to [[Legal Eagle|those]] who have not embarked upon the noble pursuit of prolixity.
+No lawyer will ever object to it, but — and ''because'' — it plays no role in unravelling the practical meaning of the legal {{t|contract}}, bar the obvious ones, where a singular does ''not'' include the plural — where a fellow is acquiring a solitary sausage from a nasty café, for very good example — and it would be a nonsense.
+Can you imagine standing up in court and learnedly submitting that a [[plural]] did not include the [[singular]]? The [[JC]] addressed this thought experiment by thumbing the pages of the {{jclr}} until he found the following testy exchange between {{jerrold}} and {{cocklecarrot}}, knee-deep, as they usually were, in bitter [[litigation]].
+{{court scene|II|iv|stares morosely at his brogues, silently cursing the wasted shoe-polish in those nasty little holes|rises briskly, causing his chair to scrape flatulently on the parquet floor. The Lord Justice raises an eyebrow. Sir Jerrold smiles thinly and rustles his briefs}}
+:'''{{jerrold}}''': M’Lud, the defendant acknowledges that it was obliged to comply with the plaintiff’s procedures — it says exactly that in clause 93.5(c)(iii)(G) of the [[indenture]], it cannot be denied — but the vital point is this: the plaintiff only had ''one'' procedure. Its operations manager, Mr Strumpet, conceded as much in cross examination this morning. So my respectful submission, M’Lud, is that nowhere in this contract — ''nowhere'' — does it require the defendant to comply with a ''single'' procedure. And for this authority I respectfully submit —” ''here Sir Jerrold looks about wildly at his junior, Master Contrario, who looks back at him blankly.'' “— ah, as authority for this well established principle of English, ah, law —”  ''here Sir Jerrold discreetly but violently jams his heel into his junior’s shin.<br>
 :'''Master Contrario''': AAAARGH! ''(collapses in agony in a dead-faint on the courtroom floor.)''
-:'''Sir Jerrold''' ''(ostensibly horrified by the scene before him)'': Well, M’Lud this is most unusual!  My learned friend is in some awful difficulty and I would pray  brief adjournment while —
+:'''{{jbm}}''' ''(ostensibly horrified by the scene before him)'': Well, M’Lud this is most unfortunate! My learned helper here is in some awful difficulty and I would pray brief adjournment while —
-:'''Cocklecarrot MR''': While the ground swallows you up, Sir Jerrold?
+:'''{{cmr}}''': While the ground swallows you up, Sir Jerrold?
+:'''{{jbm}}''': If it pleases M’Lud.
+''The Court adjourns. {{Jbm}} wipes his brow with a kerchief, and paramedics take Master Contrario away.''
+{{sa}}
+*[[Anal paradox]]