Subj : word To : Alexander Koryagin From : Ardith Hinton Date : Mon Nov 23 2020 20:42:10 Hi, Alexander! Recently you wrote in a message to Ardith Hinton: AK> For instance, where to keep your money safer -- in bank AH> | in a bank or in the bank AK> It's interesting why "on board" is written without article? AK> So you can do it if you want very much. ;) Yes, we spoke earlier of how e.g. some people say "in hospital" and others say "in the hospital". At first I thought the difference might have to do with where they grew up... but since you brought the matter to my attention I've noticed some of the same people (including Dallas & me) using both. :-)) AK> or at home? AK> In bank your money are eaten by inflation, AH> | your money is [blah blah]. Dollars, Euros, rubles etc. AH> are countable... the word "money" isn't. AK> Is it the same in American and British English? According to my Canadian dictionaries, "money" can be pluralized if you have in your possession substantial amounts from different countries or if you're treasurer of an organization which has various sources of income... but While that would justify using "are" a few francs left over from your business trip to Grenoble probably wouldn't count in most people's eyes. And AFAIK the situation is much the same in both US & UK English. I'd welcome comments from other readers, however, because I'm always open to further input.... :-) AK> It seems to me in British English, for instance, "the AK> police" is plural, and in American English, is single. AK> Also IMHO "the government". Although that rings a bell in the back of my mind, I would hesitate to make a rule about it unless I've heard a gazillion examples and/or FOWLER'S says so. I regard "police" & "government" as collective nouns because in both cases we're speaking of a group of individuals. From a grammatical standpoint we can treat the group as a unit (singular) or as xxx people (plural), and the choice we make depends on the context & on which we want to emphasize.... :-) AK> IMHO government compensates you only if a bank went bankrupt. That's my understanding too. AK> But there can be situation with a high inflation and low deposit AK> interest. You lose your money slowly and perfectly lawfully. ;-) Yes. But if you hide it under the mattress its original value will still be eaten up by inflation... that's what I was thinking of. AK> I remember my purse had been stolen in France, in Grenoble, AK> when I was there on my business trip to the 0local Atomic AK> center. I forgot it in my room, and when I went back the AK> window was opened and the purse had disappeared. I suspected AK> then an employee of the hotel. After that I took my AK> handkerchief and sewed a little bag from it with a lace and AK> wore it on my neck. IOW you made a drawstring bag. Very creative.... :-) A backpack... with my purse in it... was stolen in Los Angeles. We didn't realize until after the fact that our rental car came with a sticker in one of the back windows which made it fairly obvious we were tourists. At the hotels there were signs advising us to lock valuables in the trunk, as we did. That's what I'd have done at home... where I had an old car with a lot of rust around the wheel wells etc. and coveted the bumper sticker saying "Don't laugh -- it's paid for!" Nobody tried to steal anything from *that* car, although I drove it to a few less than salubrious parts of Vancouver. I reckon it looked to passers-by as if the driver didn't own anything worth stealing. With these older vehicles it was also far more difficult to get into the trunk than it is with modern cars... which at the time I knew very little about. Fortunately, I had my keys in my pocket & Dallas had my passport in his pocket. Nowadays I wear garments with several pockets if I can find them. It's not easy to find female garments like that. But apparently it is easy to steal handbags, shoulder bags, and backpacks if one is so inclined.... (sigh). --- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+ * Origin: Wits' End, Vancouver CANADA (1:153/716) .