<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Resonances</title>
	<atom:link href="http://inkless.danmcminn.net/resonances/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://inkless.danmcminn.net</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Jun 2010 14:40:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dan</title>
		<link>http://inkless.danmcminn.net/resonances/comment-page-1/#comment-5941</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jun 2010 14:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://inkless.danmcminn.net/?page_id=17#comment-5941</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m flattered that you asked my opinion on this matter, Androstachys. But I&#039;m afraid if I dive into the discussion on Wikipedia, I will likely only muddy the waters. By training, I&#039;m an editor, rather than a linguist, so I can tell you what I generally encounter, but any suggestions I might give would simply be personal preference.

That being so, I&#039;m fine with &quot;ances&quot; so long as discrete plural things are intended and there is sufficient precedence. So &quot;resonances&quot; meaning discrete, measured instances of resonance works for me, but I&#039;d be leery of using &quot;insurances&quot; for insurance policies. Two Reliances would be fine, if you were referring to something like Reliance &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AEC_Reliance&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;buses&lt;/a&gt;, but I would avoid using two &quot;reliances&quot; for my reliance on two different people. 

Ultimately, it comes down to what usage you feel comfortable with (or you think you can get away with) because enough people have used it before you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m flattered that you asked my opinion on this matter, Androstachys. But I&#8217;m afraid if I dive into the discussion on Wikipedia, I will likely only muddy the waters. By training, I&#8217;m an editor, rather than a linguist, so I can tell you what I generally encounter, but any suggestions I might give would simply be personal preference.</p>
<p>That being so, I&#8217;m fine with &#8220;ances&#8221; so long as discrete plural things are intended and there is sufficient precedence. So &#8220;resonances&#8221; meaning discrete, measured instances of resonance works for me, but I&#8217;d be leery of using &#8220;insurances&#8221; for insurance policies. Two Reliances would be fine, if you were referring to something like Reliance <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AEC_Reliance" rel="nofollow">buses</a>, but I would avoid using two &#8220;reliances&#8221; for my reliance on two different people. </p>
<p>Ultimately, it comes down to what usage you feel comfortable with (or you think you can get away with) because enough people have used it before you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Androstachys</title>
		<link>http://inkless.danmcminn.net/resonances/comment-page-1/#comment-5940</link>
		<dc:creator>Androstachys</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jun 2010 11:11:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://inkless.danmcminn.net/?page_id=17#comment-5940</guid>
		<description>Please look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Language#Resonances.3F.3F  and give your opinion</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Please look at <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Language#Resonances.3F.3F" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Language#Resonances.3F.3F</a>  and give your opinion</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
