<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A single conclusion?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.grammarblog.co.uk/2008/05/a-single-conclusion/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.grammarblog.co.uk/2008/05/a-single-conclusion/</link>
	<description>A blog about spelling, punctuation and grammar</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 11:12:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: JD</title>
		<link>http://www.grammarblog.co.uk/2008/05/a-single-conclusion/comment-page-1/#comment-650</link>
		<dc:creator>JD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 13:28:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://65.38.103.143/~grammarb/blog/?p=190#comment-650</guid>
		<description>I agree with you, except that you don&#039;t usually use a plural modifier even if the concept is plural. For example, &#039;egg box&#039; contains more than one egg, but we don&#039;t say &#039;eggs box&#039;. &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;So to say it must be &#039;singles day&#039; (plural) because there is more than one single person doesn&#039;t follow.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;And I think a writers&#039; strike does belong to the writers. If it isn&#039;t their strike, whose is it? But I can see the argument either way...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with you, except that you don&#8217;t usually use a plural modifier even if the concept is plural. For example, &#8216;egg box&#8217; contains more than one egg, but we don&#8217;t say &#8216;eggs box&#8217;. So to say it must be &#8216;singles day&#8217; (plural) because there is more than one single person doesn&#8217;t follow.And I think a writers&#8217; strike does belong to the writers. If it isn&#8217;t their strike, whose is it? But I can see the argument either way&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.grammarblog.co.uk/2008/05/a-single-conclusion/comment-page-1/#comment-647</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 May 2008 03:41:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://65.38.103.143/~grammarb/blog/?p=190#comment-647</guid>
		<description>Oops! I meant &quot;don&#039;t own the day&quot;. I apologize.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oops! I meant &#8220;don&#8217;t own the day&#8221;. I apologize.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.grammarblog.co.uk/2008/05/a-single-conclusion/comment-page-1/#comment-646</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 May 2008 03:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://65.38.103.143/~grammarb/blog/?p=190#comment-646</guid>
		<description>I agree with you. It&#039;s like Veterans Day and Presidents Day. The veterans and presidents own the day, it is a day to celebrate them. It is an adjective/modifier. No apostrophe.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with you. It&#8217;s like Veterans Day and Presidents Day. The veterans and presidents own the day, it is a day to celebrate them. It is an adjective/modifier. No apostrophe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://www.grammarblog.co.uk/2008/05/a-single-conclusion/comment-page-1/#comment-645</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 15:51:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://65.38.103.143/~grammarb/blog/?p=190#comment-645</guid>
		<description>Damn.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Damn.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

