[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Dave.Touretzky@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU: pluralization: two proposals]
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: [Dave.Touretzky@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU: pluralization: two proposals]
- From: Guy Steele <gls@Think.COM>
- Date: Mon, 27 Feb 89 13:10:47 EST
Subject: pluralization: two proposals
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 89 04:37:06 EST
The ~P format directive and its : and @ variants provide only the suffixes
"s" and "ies". What about nouns whose singular forms end in "s" or
"z"? They use "es" to form their plural, e.g.
bus --> buses
glass --> glasses
buzz --> buzzes
First, I propose that ~P and ~:P be modified to produce the "es" plural
form instead of "s" when given a numeric argument of -1.
Second, a more ambitious proposal: how about introducing a new conditional
directive to handle arbitrary singular/plural distinctions:
~:@[ singular ~; plural ~]
If the argument is EQL to 1, the first alternative is taken; otherwise the
second alternative is taken. This lets you do neat things like:
(format nil "There ~:@[is~;are~]~:* ~D~:* ~:@[wolf~;wolves~] here." 3)
==> "There are 3 wolves here."
(format nil "There ~:@[is~;are~]~:* ~D~:* ~:@[wolf~;wolves~] here." 1)
==> "There is 1 wolf here."
(format nil "Your tab comes to ~D~:* ~:@[wolfs'~;wolves'~] head~:P." -5)
==> "Your tab comes to -5 wolves' heads."
(format nil "Your tab comes to ~D~:* ~:@[wolf's~;wolves'~] head~:P." 1)
==> "Your tab comes to 1 wolf's head."
1) The example with -5 shows why special plural forms can't simply be
handled with an ordinary conditional by writing
2) The pluralization conditional is also useful for handling things like
possessive forms (wolf's vs. wolves') and the verb "be" (is vs. are).