People, I love ya but there is no such word as VINYLS. It's "VINYL", no 's' at end.

How are there 53 pages on this?

 

I'm not sure it's a grammatical issue since it doesn't involve sentence structure. It seems more an issue of word usage. It may be that we are in a period of transition concerning "vinyl." Some (like myself) freely use "a vinyl" or "vinyls" and are not self-conscious about it. Others oppose this evolution in word usage, for understandable reasons. I don't think there's a right or wrong in absolute terms. The world keeps changing, sometimes against our will or our preferences, and sometimes because we are the agents of such change.

 

Well the agents of change that resulted in a new and completely ridiculous definition of "literally" being added to the dictionary this year are numbnutses.

 

What is this new usage of "literally" ?

"Numbnutses" is an interesting plural form of "numbnuts," which seems to me one of those words that can be either singular or plural.

 

I guess singular is "numbnuts" (nuts being a package of two), so "numbnutses" would be correct. Unless it's like "deer" or "moose" or something. Who knows

 

You mean 'base 2' (binary), I assume...

I agree that making assumptions is the cause of all our problems in communication, if we think there are any. The fact of the matter is we all have to do it, fundamentally, and it causes misunderstanding both ways. If someone then further assumes that the problem is all coming from the other direction then there's little hope for a fruitful dialogue.

C'est la vie.

The thing is that 'being annoyed' is as much to do with the person being annoyed as it is to do with the person they think is annoying them.

The human condition, from which none of us can escape. That's not to say it's a 'bad' thing - it just is.

So, we can talk about issues of annoyance ad infinitum but they will always exist. Friendly discourse should be achievable though, if we can leave judgemental attitude based on our assumptions at the door.

 

I very thoughtful and reasonable response sir!

 

Vinyl, its a co polymer of vinyl chloride acetate, or much more catchy, PVCA
Good old (C2H3Cl)n(C4H6O2)m 180grm
Makes good floor tiles but its a little agricultural for music imho.

 

Hate to break it to you (apparently you haven't followed this entire thread closely... and who can blame you, it's ridiculously long), but it is not "grammatically incorrect". No more than the word "beers" is grammatically incorrect, when referring to several glasses containing beer. I've never heard of anyone being annoyed by the word beers, and never heard of anyone being called an "idiot" for using it.
You can be annoyed by the word vinyls, but you can't use grammatically incorrect as a reason.

 

I thing most english grammar teachers and experts would consider incorrect plural usage to be a grammatical error.

 

I'm sure they would. However this doesn't matter when we're talking about beers or vinyls. Or maybe you think most "experts" would consider those words incorrect plural usage? Maybe you can invite some of them here to share their thoughts... although it's doubtful there's anything more to be said on the matter which hasn't already been said in the last 54 pages.

 

You are using beers to justify a rule! The English language does not work that way and using one example does not prove a rule. If I say sheep does that disprove your new rule?

 

I agree, Lets put this aside and grab a few beers. I'll buy!

 

Maybe they would, maybe they wouldn't. I mentioned several examples where 'fish' and 'fishes' are both plural and both proper, depending on context. How many of you thought that Hoyt Axton's use of "fishes" was incorrect when Joy To The World came out? I know I did. I later learned that it was correct in that context. And where 'octopuses' is the correct accepted plural of 'octopus', not 'octopi' (due to it being a Greek word, not Latin).. But I can cite many examples of the latter being used, and we know what the person means when they use it.

For a long time, 'ain't' was not considered proper English. It now is, though perhaps a vulger version of 'is not'.

 

They are called "vinyls" to distinguish them from "digitals".

 

What about styrenes and shellacs?

 

You didn't hear? All I could do when I found out was facepalm myself several times - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/10240917/Uproar-as-OED-includes-erroneous-use-of-literally.html

 

No I'm not! I only use beers to justify shameless flirtation with members of the opposite sex. All along this thread I've been very "anti-rule". It's the person who is arguing that the word vinyls is "grammatically incorrect" that is trying to use a rule to hold up their argument, and it doesn't work in this case, for reasons already mentioned...

 

"beer" is an anomaly. Like "hair" and "hairs".

 

Same guys?

 

Ahhh...cheeky devil...

 

It's now in Merriam-Webster, whatever that may mean to you.

 

I think you're first post hear saids that vinyls is "NOT grammatically incorrect" and you're second post suggests that you no it IS uncorrect but you dont care for rules. Your hear just to wind peoples up?

Personally I think a few rules help.