Home » Discussion Forum—A Way with Words, a fun radio show and podcast about language

Discussion Forum—A Way with Words, a fun radio show and podcast about language

A Way with Words, a radio show and podcast about language and linguistics.

Discussion Forum (Archived)

Please consider registering
Guest
Forum Scope


Match



Forum Options



Min search length: 3 characters / Max search length: 84 characters
The forums are currently locked and only available for read only access
sp_TopicIcon
I suppose "RsBI" does sound pretty ridiculous
Guest
1
2011/06/12 - 4:08pm

Now that we're in the midst of the baseball season (and my team has pretty much all-but-mathematically removed itself from the playoffs already), a persistent question comes to mind, so I thought I'd ask it. The statistic "Run Batted in" is abbreviated "RBI" (oh, and this question has nothing to do with the annoying pronunciation "RIB-ee" that I occasionally hear). Often, on sports broadcasts, when someone has sent home more than one run, the common abbreviation is itself made plural, as "RBIs." Now, of course, as my subject title suggests, "RsBI" would be kind of ridiculous. But I think the best way is just to use the "RBI" designation for both singular and plural (so, for example, "Adrian Gonzalez leads the American League with 60 RBI."

I know this happens in many other areas besides baseball, or other sports (for another example, the plural "attorneys general" would most likely be abbreviated "AGs", as in, "numerous state AGs have filed suit challenging the federal Affordable Care Act"), but I've been curious about the "RBI"-thing for quite some time. Thoughts?

Guest
2
2011/06/12 - 6:41pm

The league is gonna do exactly what it wants to do, grammar be damned. I'm fine with RBI being either singular or plural. There are precedents. But I'm not gonna lose any sleep over it.

Your comment about "AGs" recalls a long-standing debate ... who controls the acronyms?

Guest
3
2011/06/12 - 7:38pm

Heimhenge said:

The league is gonna do exactly what it wants to do, grammar be damned. I'm fine with RBI being either singular or plural. There are precedents. But I'm not gonna lose any sleep over it. . . .


I'm not gonna lose any sleep over it, either. And it's not Beelzebub — I'm sorry, Bud (a.k.a., "Asshead" or "Hypocrite") Selig — or MLB who mandates the abbreviation. It's the sports-news anchors. I'm simply in favor of the non-plural "RBI" for even plural "RBI" (once again, "Adrian Gonzalez [damn you, Padres; why did you let him go?] leads the American League with 60 RBI," not "RsBI"). I think my boy Tim Kurkjian on ESPN uses my recommended phrase, but I could be wrong — I might be imputing it to him because he's my favorite baseball commentator, and I want him to side with me. Whatever.

The answer to your final question is "we". We control the acronyms. Not you or I as know-it-alls, but "the people" in general. And I'd hoped "the people" would get behind my version of pluralization of abbreviations.

Guest
4
2011/06/13 - 2:06am

Reminds me of a discussion I heard (forty or fifty years ago?) about whether it should be "anyone else's" or "anyone's else". Spell checker doesn't like "else's".

johng423
129 Posts
(Offline)
5
2011/06/15 - 12:16pm

From what I've seen and heard, common usage seems to treat an acronym/initialism as a singular noun [1 run batted in = 1 RBI], then creates the plurals based on that [2 runs batted in = 2 RBIs], even if the plural using the original full phrase would be formed differently [run(s) batted in]. Other examples include the previously mentioned "attorney(s) general"/AG(s), and "mother(s)-in-law"/MILs (with similar usage for other in-laws), among others.

And if the acronym/initialism already includes the plural, we don't necessarily change it to indicate singular or plural [miles per gallon = MPG, but 1 mile per gallon = 1 MPG; pages per minute = PPM, but 1 page per minute = 1 PPM].

I thought maybe the formation of plurals came from how we had treated abbreviations, but the only examples I can think of at the moment (admittedly, they are measurements) show otherwise [volt = V, but 60 volts = 60V; horse power (or should that be one word?) = HP, but 1 horse power = 1 HP]. There are probably examples showing otherwise, but that would show again that usage is inconsistent.

I would be interested in any other information or thoughts.

johng423
129 Posts
(Offline)
6
2011/06/15 - 12:20pm

Reading tunawrite's post, this thought just flashed through my mind: If MLB means Major League Baseball, would/should a minor league baseball organization use an lowercase "m" as in mLB? (Or am I just getting silly?)

Guest
7
2011/06/15 - 1:10pm

I can tell you that usage conventions for scientific measurements are highly standardized within the field, probably because the need for consistency in scientific journals is imperative. Both SI and NIST actually have published guidelines for this. For example, see:

http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/checklist.html

Forum Timezone: UTC -7
Show Stats
Administrators:
Martha Barnette
Grant Barrett
Moderators:
Grant Barrett
Top Posters:
Newest Members:
A Conversation with Dr Astein Osei
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 1
Topics: 3647
Posts: 18912

 

Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 618
Members: 1268
Moderators: 1
Admins: 2
Most Users Ever Online: 1147
Currently Online:
Guest(s) 83
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Recent posts