On Sun, 31 Jul 2016 21:34:44 +0000 (UTC), Brian Reay wrote:
On Thu, 19 May 2016 11:07:03 -0700, Mike Ross wrote:
On Thursday, October 8, 2015 at 8:28:38 AM UTC-4, gareth wrote:
"joe" wrote:
gareth wrote:

I have in my possession a book entitled, "Antennae", published in
1942 by a lecturer to both King's College, London, and also to
various Brit government establishments.

At some point since then, the ignorance of either engineers or of
Yanks has tried to pass off, "Antennas" as the plural.

If we pride ourselves on the exactness of our principles, then it is
high time to correct this glaring error by the Yanks.

(Book being studied avidly, although with some necessary revision ov
vector field theory; div, curl and grad, anyone?)

From an online dictionary:

I guess that it would be a fair assumption, bearing in mind the
development of computers and, much later, the Internet, that your
online dictionaries originated several decades after 1942, and long
after the ignoramuses' error arose?

Um, wouldn't that be "ignorami"??

Clearly the attempt of a person lacking even the most elemental education
in the classics. The Latin word ignoramus is not a noun, and so cannot
be declined. Even if it were, its genitive plural is somthing quite
different.

Please, God, let this thread die!