We speak of referendums, not referenda, on the advice of the editors of the Oxford English Dictionary: Referendum is logically preferable as a plural form meaning ballots on one issue (as a Latin gerund referendum has no plural). The Latin plural gerundive referenda, meaning ‘things to be referred’, necessarily connotes a plurality of issues.
If that is the case, it will take ****ing ages to sort that out for the 2.2 million or whatever Brits are living abroad.
If I correctly understand, though, it makes a difference whether the English word "referendum" has its origins in the gerundive (in which case it admits the Latin plural "referenda") or in the gerund (in which case it has no Latin plural).
You would be told about the company's vision and values, commitment to customer satisfaction, that sort of thing. Also, where the fire escapes are. And how to look after the local cozzers.
You've just answered the case in question, Mick. We are discussing single issue referendums, in which case we must employ the English plural: referendums. I am all for Latin terms when the need arises, yet this is not one of those occasions. As an advisor to the OED, I am always happy to pass judgement on such matters.
To be honest I don't think anyone has mentioned that scenario,simple task of flying to another country in the morning on business and flying back that day,what would happen then?**** knows,the Brits will have to line up with the Romanians and Albanians before they get clearance
There will always be business class for those of us who wish to avoid such oppressive vapours and malefactors.
Was only at it,I do believe both can be used and are correct.Came across this when doing my research,Dan will love it Remember after the Hillsborough disaster? The plural of stadium was in regular use, and the media (mediums?) decided that we simple folks would be confused if they used 'stadia'. So stadiums is now firmly established as the plural of stadium. I await the appearance of the plural form 'criterions'.
Referendums and referenda are legitimate terms; within the context of this debate, however, I am correct. As for stadia, media and criterions, I would allow myself to be guided by the targeted reader. I would favour Latin terminology for the eminent GC member, and a basic form for the Sunderland and Newcastle boards.
Location of panic button to hit when aging punters turn aggressive when they can't get it up? Post-session jizz mopping procedure?
Meh. Like we should listen to banks and businesses about what they think. The banks ****ed us over. Big business **** us over all the time. Makes me laff when the boss of such and such bank/business thinks what they say counts for ****in anything. Oh yeah, big lad? Us plebs will ****in decide and you and your ilk will have to work out new ways to line your pockets. Trade is trade. Trade will happen regardless if you have goods/services that others want. We've been listening to banks/business too long and got ****ed over for it. Start the revolution now!
I was making the point that it's strange that it's coming out now. Bankers are scum, Ireland will be paying for their obnoxious greed for a generation.
I don't know much about high finance but if this goes through does it not insure our markets a bit if we pull out as they will still have a foothold in the EU?
It's just a trading company valued at £8 billion. Krauts have been after controlling it for years though, expect it will end up with job losses in London and new jobs in Germany. Pretty good example of what the EU is all about.
Markets are always going to be tradeable. This is about who gets to charge a fee on the trade and who pockets the tax from that fee.
Will it lead to the threat of more job losses, less tax paid in the UK if the vote is to leave the EU?
