Amoral is an interesting exception, where a- combines with a Latin stem which is also an ordinary English word. The prefix a- then makes the vital difference between amoral “lacking in moral values” and immoral “contrary to moral values” (where im- is a negative).

   For more about negative prefixes, see de-, in-/im-, non- and un-.

-a  This suffix is really several suffixes. They come into English with loanwords from other languages, including Italian, Spanish, Latin and Greek, and may represent either singular or plural. In gondola (Italian), siesta (Spanish), formula (Latin) and dogma (Greek), the -a is a singular ending; whereas in bacteria (Latin) and criteria (Greek) it is a plural ending.    Loanwords ending in singular -a are not to be taken for granted because their plurals may or may not go according to a foreign pattern. Loanwords which come with a plural -a ending pose other grammatical questions. Let’s deal with each group in turn.

   1 Words with the singular -a mostly make their plurals in the usual English way, by adding an s. This is true for all the Italian and Spanish ones, and many of the Latin ones. So gondola becomes gondolas, siesta becomes siestas, and aroma becomes aromas. The numerous Latin names for plants, for example acacia, angophora, grevillea and protea, all take English plurals. However some Latin loanwords, particularly those in academic fields, have Latin plurals formed with -ae as well: formulae and formulas; retinae and retinas etc. The plurals with -ae prevail in writing intended for scientists and scholars, and the forms with -s in nonspecialised writing and conversation. The group with both Latin and English plurals includes:

abscissa alumna am(o)eba aorta aura caesura cicada cornea echidna fibula formula hydra lacuna lamina larva mora nebula nova patellapenumbra persona piscina placenta pupa retina stoa tibia trachea ulna urethra vagina vertebra

   The words in italics are more likely overall to be found with English plurals, for various reasons. Those which serve as both the technical and the common term (e.g. cicada, echidna), and the more familiar medical words (cornea, retina) were voted English plurals by more than 85 percent of Australians of all ages, surveyed through the magazine Australian Style in 1999. For some other words (e.g. trachea) the occasions on which a plural might be needed are not very many, and the likelihood of an ad hoc English plural is all the greater.

   Note that for antenna the two plurals are used in different fields (see antenna).

   Greek loanwords with singular -a can also have two plural forms. They bring with them their Greek plural suffix -ta, though they soon acquire English plurals with s as well. The Greek -ta plurals survive in scholarly, religious or scientific writing, while in other contexts the English s plurals are dominant. Compare the traumas of everyday life with the traumata which are the concerns of medicine and psychology. Other loanwords which use both English and Greek plurals are:

dogma lemma magma miasma schema stigma

   Note that for both dogma and stigma, the Greek plural is strongly associated with Catholic orthodoxy (see stigma).

   2 Words with the plural -a from Latin are often collective in meaning, like bacteria, data and media. We do not need to pluralise them, nor do we often need their singular forms, though they do exist: bacterium, datum etc. (For more information see -um.) The grammatical status of words like media (whether they should be treated as singulars or plurals) is unclear, and can be hotly disputed.

   Those who know Latin are inclined to insist on plural agreement in such cases, on the grounds that data and media (not to mention candelabra) “are plural”. Yet the argument appeals to Latin rather than English grammar; and it is surely undermined by other cases, such as agenda and stamina, which are also Latin plurals but are always combined with singular verbs in English. For more about the question of singular/plural agreement, see collective nouns and agreement, as well as candelabra, data and media.

   Greek loanwords with a plural -a, such as automata, criteria, ganglia and phenomena, are discussed at -on.

   For the choice between -a and -er in spelling some Australian colloquialisms, see -er/-a.a

   In restaurants more transparent phrases are used these days to show when the menu and its price are predetermined by the establishment itself—simply fixed price menu, or prix fixe (in France and francophone Canada). In Italy it’s menu turistico. Many restaurants offer both fixed price and à la carte menus.

a posteriori    Borrowed from Latin, this phrase means “by a later effect or instance”. It refers to arguments which reason from the effect to the cause, or those which work from a specific instance back to a generalisation. A posteriori arguments are thus concerned with using empirical observation as the basis of reasoning, and with inductive argument. They contrast with a priori arguments, on which see next entry.

a priori    This phrase, borrowed from Latin, means “from the prior (assumption)”. It identifies an argument which reasons from cause to a presumed effect, or which works deductively from a general principle to the specific case. Because such reasoning relies on theory or presumption rather than empirical observation, an a priori argument is often judged negatively. It seems to make assertions before analysing the evidence. Compare a posteriori.

a quattr’occhi    See under au pair.

abacus    For the plural of this word, see under -us.

abattoir or abattoirs

Abattoir is the older and more widely used form of this word worldwide, though abattoirs is certainly well used (in reference to a single establishment) in Australia. In Australian documents on the internet they appear in the ratio of 5:4. Of the two, abattoir is easier to work with, because there’s no doubt that the following verb is singular. If you use abattoirs, it poses the further problem as to whether the verb should be singular or plural (see further under agreement).

abbreviations These are standardised short forms of words or phrases. A few of them, like AIDS and RSI, are better known than the full phrase; and some abbreviated words like bus and pram stand in their own right (see further under clipping). Abbreviations are accepted as ways of representing the full word or phrase in many kinds of functional and informative writing. Some would say that they are unacceptable in formal writing, though we might debate which types of writing are “formal”. Abbreviations would probably look strange in a novel or essay. Yet who can imagine a letter which does not carry abbreviations somewhere in referring to people and places. Business and technical reports can hardly do without them.

   Provided they are not obscure to the reader, abbreviations communicate more with fewer letters. Writers have only to ensure that the abbreviations they use are either too well known to need any introduction, or that they are introduced and explained on their first appearance. Once the reader knows that in a particular document CCC equals the Canberra Cat Club, the short form can be used regularly.

   1 Punctuating \,\,abbreviations raises questions of policy because of the differing conventions practised in Australia. They include:

   using full stops with any shortened form: C.S.I.R.O. Mr. Rev. mgr. incl.

   using full stops with abbreviations, but not contractions (see below): C.S.I.R.O. Mr Rev. mgr incl.

   using full stops with abbreviations which have any lower case letters in them: CSIRO Mr. Rev. mgr. incl.

   using full stops with abbreviations which consist entirely of lower case letters: CSIRO Mr Rev mgr. incl.

   The options all have their advantages and disadvantages.

   Option (a) is the easiest option to implement, and was once standard practice in the US. But the Chicago Manual of Style (1993) recognised the worldwide trend to use less punctuation, or no more punctuation than is really necessary, and in the following edition (2003) finally modified its time-honored policy (in favor of Option (c) below). Many abbreviations are obviously such, and readers do not need full stops to remind them.

   Option (b) turns on the distinction between abbreviations and contractions, which has developed in British editorial practice. (See further under contractions, section 1.) The distinction, also known in Australia, gives different punctuation to “true” abbreviations, that is, ones which cut words short (Tas. for Tasmania), and to contractions which telescope the word, keeping both the first and last letters (Qld for Queensland). Under this system the full stop only goes with abbreviations, and it shows where the word has been cut off. However it presents a conundrum with pluralised abbreviations. Should the plural of the abbreviation fig. be figs, figs., or even fig.s? If we decide strictly by the abbreviation/contraction rule, as does the Australian Government Style Manual (2002), it would be figs because with the plural s added the abbreviation becomes a contraction. To treat singular and plural shortened forms differently may seem unfortunate. Yet if we adopt figs. we create other anomalies, because the full stop no longer marks where the word has been cut. Figs. is nevertheless the practice for plural abbreviations in Butcher’s Copy-editing (2006), and noted in New Hart’s Rules (2005). Fig.s does not seem to be recommended anywhere.

   Option (c). According to this option, full stops are dispensed with for abbreviations which consist of full capitals, but retained for those with just an initial capital, or consisting entirely of lower case. It accommodates the general trend towards leaving stops out of institutional abbreviations such as ABC and ACTU. So NSW is left unstopped, while Tas. and Qld. would have them. The treatment of abbreviated state names is thus still anomalous, and there are inconsistencies elsewhere where initialisms and capitalised abbreviations rub shoulders with each other, as in computer texts.

   Option (d) simply draws a line between abbreviations which begin with a capital letter and those which do not. It leaves NSW, Qld and Tas all unstopped, while a.m., a.s.a.p. and fig. are all stopped. The distinction between contractions and abbreviations is dropped, making for consistency in both capitalised examples (Qld, Tas) and lower case ones (fig., figs.) whether singular or plural.

   A fifth option, to use no stops at all in abbreviations, is not commonly practised though it would be easiest of all to implement. It would resolve the anomalies created by distinguishing contractions from abbreviations, and also break down the invisible barrier between abbreviations and symbols (see below). Removing stops from all abbreviations would (it’s sometimes said) lead to confusion between lower case abbreviations and ordinary words. Yet there are very few abbreviations which could be mistaken for ordinary words. Those which are identical, such as am, fig and no, are normally accompanied by numbers: 10 am, fig 13, no 2, and there is no doubt as to what they are.

   2 Policies and minimising anomalies. Dictionaries, style guides, and publishers and their editors all have to determine a policy from among the options above. The Australian Government Style Manual (2002) uses a combination of options (b) and (c), preserving the abbreviations/contractions distinction, but recommending the removal of stops from abbreviations that consist entirely of capitals. Australia Post recommends the use of full caps and unstopped forms for the shortened forms of all states: QLD, NSW, ACT, VIC, TAS, SA, WA, NT, creating a self-consistent set with no distinction between abbreviations and contractions.

   A majority of Australians surveyed in 1996 through the magazine Australian Style (63%) voted in favor of removing stops from fully capitalised abbreviations like ACTU. The distinction between abbreviations and contractions was maintained by a lesser majority, in withholding stops from words like Pty (61%) and mgr (53%). There was more conviction about continuing to use stops in abbreviations like Rev. which combine upper and lower case (73%), and very strong support (86%) for keeping stops in lower case abbreviations like cont. The results suggest that Australians at large incline towards option (c), though some would still combine it with option (b). Individual writers and editors who are not committed to a given house style are free to choose whatever policy minimises anomalies for them.

   Note that when an abbreviation with a stop is the last word in a sentence, no further stop is added, according to the current convention of allowing the major stop to cover for any lesser ones. This poses a difficulty for readers who wish to know whether the abbreviation has its own full stop or not. Unless the matter is explained or exemplified nearby, it’s best to remake the sentence so as to bring the abbreviation in from the end. (This was done in discussing figs, figs. and fig.s in option (b) above.)

   3 Special categories of abbreviations. Some groups of abbreviations are always written without stops, whatever the writer’s policy on upper and lower case, contractions etc. They include:

a)   the symbols for SI units: kg, ml etc. (See SI units.)
b)   the compass points: N, NE, SW etc.

c)   chemical symbols: Na, Fe etc.
d)   symbols for currencies: , $ etc.
e)   acronyms: Anzac, laser etc. (See further under acronyms.)

For the use of stops with the initials of a person’s name, see under names.
(See also Latin abbreviations.)

ABC  In Australia these letters usually stand for the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, its name since 1983. It changed then from being the Australian Broadcasting Commission as it was for the first half-century of its existence. Founded in 1932, it was intended to be a national voice like the BBC; and since 1954 it has maintained a Standing Committee on Spoken English (SCOSE). The committee’s prime role is to advise broadcasting personnel on the pronunciation of proper names, especially foreign ones. But it also gives attention to current usage issues such as the reporting of terrorist activities, and maintaining a nonsexist language policy over the airwaves. The ABC’s nickname Aunty is itself sexist, but a harder nut for SCOSE to crack. (See further under auntie.)

   Note also that ABC is used by sociologists and demographers to mean “Australian-born Chinese”. (See further under Chinaman.)

-ability  This ending marks the conversion of adjectives with -able into abstract nouns, as when respectable becomes respectability. Adjectives with -ible are converted by the same process, so flexible becomes flexibility. The ending is not a simple suffix but a composite of:
•   the conversion of -ble to a stressed syllable -bil and
•   the addition of the suffix -ity.

ablative  This grammatical case operates in Latin and some other languages, but not English. It marks a noun as having the meaning “by, with, or from” attached to it. For some Latin nouns, the ablative ending is -o, and so ipso facto means “by that fact”. (See further under case.)

-able/-ible  Many good spellers have trouble knowing which of these endings should be used. Both sound the same, and which one should be used often seems arbitrary. Compare indispensable with comprehensible, traversable with reversible, and enforceable with forcible. Just a handful of these words can be spelled in more than one way, for example collectable/collectible and deductable/ deductible. But most are fixed one way or the other, and only one spelling will do.

   Overall there are more words with -able, because it combines with any English or French verb, and also comes with those from the Latin first conjugation. By contrast, -ible is restricted to those based on verbs from the other Latin conjugations. That’s fine if you know Latin, but if you don’t the table below will help you with the most important -ible words. Where there are both positive and negative (i.e. possible as well as impossible) it gives one or the other, because there’s no difference in the way that their endings are spelled.

accessible adducible admissible audible combustible compatible compressible contemptible credible deducible digestible discernible divisible edible eligible expressible feasible flexible forcible gullible impressible incomprehensible incontrovertible incorrigible incorruptible indefensible indelible indestructible inexhaustible infallible intelligible invincible irascible irresistible legible negligible ostensible perceptible permissible persuasible plausible possible reducible reprehensible repressible responsible reversible sensible submersible suggestible suppressible susceptible tangible terrible transmissible visible

   Note that if the word you wish to write is too new to be listed in a dictionary, you can confidently spell it with -able since all new formations go that way: contactable, playable, ungetatable. For the choice between drivable and driveable, likable and likeable etc., see further under -eable.

Aboriginal or Aborigine Which term to use when you refer to one of the original inhabitants of Australia has been a fraught question. The Australian Government Style Manual has changed its recommendation with every edition since 1978, reflecting the sensitivity of the issue. The sixth edition (2002) recommends Aboriginal (plural Aboriginals) in reference to individuals, and Aboriginal people(s) for use in official documents. But it acknowledges also that Aborigine(s) is strongly supported in common usage, and found in a wide range of publications “without disparaging overtones”. Its appearance in newspaper headlines is clear indication of its neutrality.

   In the past, a curious compromise was sometimes adopted, using Aboriginal for the singular noun, while Aborigines was allowed as its plural. This reflects an older concern that the Oxford Dictionary citations were only for the plural, and Aborigine was therefore an unacceptable backformation. However the Australian National Dictionary (1988) has citations for the singular form going back to the first half of the nineteenth century, and it has always been part of Australian English. In the Australian ACE corpus Aborigine(s) heavily outnumbers Aboriginal(s) for the noun, by 11:3 in the singular and 133:18 in the plural.

   Among Aborigines themselves the issue is debated. Some, according to the Aboriginal Research Centre at Monash University, reject the name Aboriginal because it perpetuates the phrase aboriginal natives which was used by the Australian Government to deny them tribal identity and territory. Their own preferred solution is to find a more specific term wherever possible, depending on their region. Those in NSW and Victoria are Koori(e)s (see individual entry); while those in other states and regions are named as follows:

   Maps showing these areas can be found in the Macquarie Atlas of Indigenous Australia (2005). According to the Aboriginal Research Centre at Monash University, two of those names can refer to Aboriginal people more broadly: Koori(e) is acceptable to Aborigines throughout southern and central Australia, and Murri is the one used for those in northern Australia. See also Black.

   Whichever word you use, it should have a capital letter, as with any ethnic or tribal name (see capitals). Without a capital letter, aborigine(s) means the original inhabitants of any continent, not Australia in particular.

Aboriginal names The names of some Aboriginal groups can be spelled in more than one way, for example Pintupi, Pintubi or Bindubi. It happens most often with ones containing the letters p or b, t or d, and k or g. A little phonetics helps to explain why. The sounds “p” and “b” are hardly different when you say them (except for the way the vocal cords vibrate for “b”), and the same is true for the other pairs. And though they are different sounds in English, most Aboriginal languages treat the members of each pair as one and the same. Whichever pronunciation you use—Pintupi or Bindubi—the word remains the same, and Katoomba Kedumba, Kakadu Gagadu etc. are really the same word.