atw: Re: in's or ins' or ins
- From: "Matthew da Silva" <mdasilva@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 08:31:24 +1100
Pls remember that 95 of everything that appears online is at least
questionable, if not suspect.
Matthew
________________________________
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of MHT
Sent: Tuesday, 15 January 2008 8:29 AM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Re: in's or ins' or ins
My first choice as well - despite the considerable variations that can
be (and were) pointed out in any host of sources on the WWW, including
"professional" sources. But thank you for your input as well as the
kind reminder to get a brain.
MHT a.k.a The Scarecrow
On 1/14/2008 2:59:41 PM, austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> This is a total n0-brainer. The third list is correct.
>
> Matthew da Silva
> The University of Sydney, NSW, 2006
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
>
>
> From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:austechwriter-
> bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of MHT
> Sent: Tuesday, 15 January 2008 6:44 AM
> To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: atw: in's or ins' or ins
>
>
> Greeting all,
> Which is correct (non-possessive):
>
> Check-up's
> Check-in's
> Built-in's
> Plug-in's
> Drop-in's
> Punch-in's
> or
> Check-ups'
> Check-ins'
> Built-ins'
> Plug-ins'
> Drop-ins'
> Punch-ins'
> or
> Check-ups
> Check-ins
> Built-ins
> Plug-ins
> Drop-ins
> Punch-ins
>
> Kind Regards,
> MHT
Other related posts:
