0

This question already has an answer here:

Prompted by recent remembrance day celebrations, it seems to me that the term PoWs is inconsistent with pluralization conventions.

Runs Batted In --> RBI

Prisoners of War--> PoW (shouldn't this be the plural?)

I read that laser appears to have become a noun unto itself and is thus pluralized as lasers.

Is PoWs an accepted noun or is it an oddly pluralized acronym?



Other acronym pluralization questions that don't address PoW(s) directly:

What is the correct way to define an acronym when its first appearance is plural?

Should acronyms that are actually hidden plurals be treated as plural?

marked as duplicate by Scott, Helmar, tchrist Sep 27 '16 at 13:35

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • "Laser appears to have become a noun ..."? It's been a noun for a very long time, and I can think of no good reason for not saying "lasers". – David Garner Nov 13 '15 at 14:34
  • I think you may have misrepresented RBI. It's singular and short for Run Batted In. It would be odd to hear Scott Van Pelt say "he was the league leader with 113 RBI". In speech usage it's always "RBIs". Similarly POW refers to a single Prisoner Of War, and POWs is the natural plural. – Misneac Nov 13 '15 at 14:37
  • In the US it's "POW", not "PoW". And "POWs" is typically used for the plural. – Hot Licks Nov 13 '15 at 14:41
  • @DavidGarner The term "laser" originated as an acronym for "light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation". – Minnow Nov 13 '15 at 14:46
  • Laser is a weird one anyway, in that while it derives from an acronym, it isn't one. You can't generally replace "laser"with the phrase "light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation". And good luck with trying to pluralise that phrase. "LASER" (the acronym) is the process by which "lasers" operate. – Rupe Nov 13 '15 at 15:38
2

No, the way it works for POW is typical. One pluralises the initialism rather than forming a new (but the same) initialism out of the plural.

A person might have studied for multiple MAs, a conference might be attended by many CEOs and MDs, and so on.

EDIT: originally I said (based on what's in the OP) that RBI is the one that's less usual in that it is an initialism formed from a plural, and hence one does not pluralise the initialism. Apparently that's incorrect, RBI stands for 'Run Batted In' and RBIs is the normal plural form.

  • While I don't dispute how to say CEOs or MDs, if one expands them they are naturally plural: Chief Operating Officers, Medical Doctors. That seems different than Prisoners of War, where the plural is before the last letter of the acronym. – Minnow Nov 13 '15 at 14:44
  • 1
    I'm 99.44% certain that RBI is singular. It's pretty common to say something like "he got an important RBI in the top of the 6th" or "He got 2 RBIs in the 7th". I think the main reason they leave the "s" off the stat sheets and back of baseball cards is because it would be nearly illegible to have an even smaller font than what's already there. – Misneac Nov 13 '15 at 14:47
  • @Minnow Fair point, MA was certainly a better example. – Rupe Nov 13 '15 at 14:47
  • @Misneac I do like your two decimal place certainty, but some baseball commentators do use RBI in the plural en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Run_batted_in. – Minnow Nov 13 '15 at 14:50
  • 1
    Here's an oddity: in the British media, 'WAGs' is used for 'Wives And Girlfriends', as in "WAGs will not be permitted to accompany the team on the next tour". Since [apart from any two-timing that's going on] any individual from the WAGs is either a wife OR a girlfriend, logically the singular of WAGs should be WOG. For several reasons, it won't catch on. – David Garner Nov 13 '15 at 16:20

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.