Which is The Correct Way?

[Oliver1954]

Hi Guys,

 

Funny how we get these weird unimportant thoughts, I have been wondering for the past few day's (well, since last Saturday after a visit to the Crick Show) which is the "correct" way to write the abbreiviation for Narrowboat or should that be Narrow Boat (there I go again) !

I really must get out more Oh wait, that's what started all this... by going out.. to a Boat Show!!

[John Orentas]

If I remember about 20 years ago Waterways World took out some form of copyright on the word Narrowboat and even gained some acceptance with the O E D.

 

All triggered I think by the demise of the magazine. Narrow Boat.. To be picky I don't think either abbreviation is correct.

Edited May 28, 2008 by John Orentas

[Machpoint005]

You see the expression 'nb Saucy Sal' or whatever, with the nb pretending to be like 'SS' or 'HMS'. I think it's pretentious twaddle.

But given the choice, 'nb' (lower case) is better, because 'NB' is nota bene.

 

Couldn't really give one, though.

[Chertsey]

OK, making up the rules as I go along...

'narrow boat' is the old way of writing it and therefore, I decree, of referring to boats in a historical context and possibly to historical boats. The Historic Narrow Boat Owners Club has it as two words. But then they don't have an apostrophe, so what do they know?

 

'narrowboat' - one word - often seems to be the way to refer to modern craft. Maybe this distinguishes them from other narrow boats, like narrow beam cruisers.

 

The abbreviation for narrowboat wound be 'nb' or even more properly, 'n/b'; for 'narrow boat' then probably N.B. But then I write narrow boat and call the blog nbWarrior, so what do I know either?

 

Oh, and WW now call their historic glossy NarrowBoat, but then it is trendy these days to run words together with a capital letter in the middle.

 

Would anyone like to talk about possessive apostrophes?

 

You see the expression 'nb Saucy Sal' or whatever, with the nb pretending to be like 'SS' or 'HMS'. I think it's pretentious twaddle.

But given the choice, 'nb' (lower case) is better, because 'NB' is nota bene.

 

Couldn't really give one, though.

 

Ah. Simultaneous posting. Both good points. Useful sometimes though to have a prefix as a shorthand to let people know that it is a boat you're talking about, rather than an actual Warrior or, indeed, a Saucy Sal. It's not as pretentious as referring to your narrow boat as 'the good ship'.

 

Edited again - I keep thinking of new things. What does annoy me is when people append a definite article to the name of a boat, although if Gayford does it (and she does) again, who am I to argue? Would 'real' boatmen have done this though - i.e. 'The Battersea', 'The Pavo'?

Edited May 28, 2008 by WarriorWoman

[Machpoint005]

It's not as pretentious as referring to your narrow boat as 'the good ship'.

 

... or 'she'

[Chertsey]

... or 'she'

Absolutely!!!!

[Machpoint005]

I imagine I'm not alone in referring to my boat (almost invariably) as ... 'the boat' .

[Chertsey]

I imagine I'm not alone in referring to my boat (almost invariably) as ... 'the boat' .

And 'it' for short. None of this namby pamby seagoing anthropomorphising for us.

[Windjammer]

I don't see how its any different to M.V (motor vessel) or S.S (steamship) or S.V. (sailing vessel), so presumerably its N.B ?

[Janet S]

Would anyone like to talk about possessive apostrophes?

 

Where is our resident pedantic pillock when he's needed?

 

Janet

[blackrose]

I don't see how its any different to M.V (motor vessel) or S.S (steamship) or S.V. (sailing vessel), so presumerably its N.B ?

 

So what's a widebeam abreviated to? W.B. or just W. or is it N.B.S.W.B. (narrow boat style wide beam) or N.B.S.W? I guess the last two are too long to be abreviations!

 

Anyway, I refer to my boat as "the Mothership", as in "Ok, see you later, I'm going back to the Mothership." It always gets an odd look and is great for winding up people who take boating too seriously.

[Dyad]

On a similar theme. My sister used to work at Medway Bridge Marina near Rochester in Kent. Now that I've taken an interest in narrowboats we often chat about boats. When I say kitchen she will quickly correct me and say "galley" and also if I say bathroom or toilet she'll pounce with "the heads". Bless her.

 

Kev

[Gary Peacock]

Hi Guys,

 

Funny how we get these weird unimportant thoughts, I have been wondering for the past few day's (well, since last Saturday after a visit to the Crick Show) which is the "correct" way to write the abbreiviation for Narrowboat or should that be Narrow Boat (there I go again) !

I really must get out more Oh wait, that's what started all this... by going out.. to a Boat Show!!

 

I quite like "Ditch Crawler" it's catchy and descriptive.

[rallyfan]

The Oxford English Dictionary (what better source?) says "narrowboat"

[Machpoint005]

The Oxford English Dictionary (what better source?) says "narrowboat"

 

It also says 'avocado', but as my landlord used to say, what's that got to do with steam navigation?

[journeyperson]

The Oxford English Dictionary (what better source?) says "narrowboat"

 

I'm often asked where my barge is parked. I just tell them Stretford and don't lose any sleep over it.

[carlt]

Reminds me of a similar debate in "another place" about how we shouldn't call a cratch board a cratch board "because it's wrong".

 

When I quoted noted canal historians and ex working boaters who used the term I was told (without defending references) that I was wrong and just because the term is used, doesn't mean it exists (huh??).

 

So, call it what you like. It used to be "narrow boat" but now seems to be "narrowboat" but, in the historical context, WW is wrong.

 

My Firefox (or should it be fire fox?) spellchecker (or should it be spell checker?) doesn't like "narrowboat", but then again, it doesn't like firefox either.

 

I think we should do away with spaces altogether because my spacebar (or is it space bar?) is rubbish and I have to go back and correct all the time.

[tidal]

As you vessels are all inshore civilian craft I believe that under international convention you are entitled to use the prefix of your choice.

See HERE

 

However, if memory serves, I believe that should you take you narrowboat across the Atlantic to the USA, your first radio call to the CG must designate the type of vessel either using one of the propulsion based terms or (if you are a naval commissioned vessel) the official designation.

 

As a matter of courtesy (and to help them identify you) it is common practice to prefix radio calls to shore stations in this country with a designation before the vessels name such as "yacht [vessel name]" "MV[vessel name]" which I suppose is no bad idea for narrow boats on a tideway from a safety perspective.

 

 

But as others have said too, What do I know

[Chertsey]

So, call it what you like. It used to be "narrow boat" but now seems to be "narrowboat" but, in the historical context, WW is wrong.

 

More than happy to be corrected by Carl but can you elaborate cos I don't know quite which bit is wrong.

 

edited owing to a sudden attack of optimism - maybe it's Waterways World that's wrong and not the other WW? But if it is me I'd stiill like to know.

Edited May 29, 2008 by WarriorWoman

[carlt]

More than happy to be corrected by Carl but can you elaborate cos I don't know quite which bit is wrong.

 

edited owing to a sudden attack of optimism - maybe it's Waterways World that's wrong and not the other WW? But if it is me I'd stiill like to know.

Sorry WW!

 

Waterways World is wrong to miss the space out of the title of their heritage publication. Surely the ideal place to use the term in it's "historical context".

[Dominic M]

Reminds me of a similar debate in "another place" about how we shouldn't call a cratch board a cratch board "because it's wrong".

 

When I quoted noted canal historians and ex working boaters who used the term I was told (without defending references) that I was wrong and just because the term is used, doesn't mean it exists (huh??).

 

So, call it what you like. It used to be "narrow boat" but now seems to be "narrowboat" but, in the historical context, WW is wrong.

 

My Firefox (or should it be fire fox?) spellchecker (or should it be spell checker?) doesn't like "narrowboat", but then again, it doesn't like firefox either.

 

I think we should do away with spaces altogether because my spacebar (or is it space bar?) is rubbish and I have to go back and correct all the time.

Doesn't the English language have a tradition of joining words together - from its Saxon roots which is unsurprising as German happily joins loads of words together to describe an object? Fine historical English examples are, for example, wherewithal, albeit, heretofore, inasmuch, gordonbrown. I lied about the last one.

 

We should happily marry words together, I say. Forthwith.

[Bones]

it should be written out in full at all times and in all places......

 

regards

nb Bones

[FadeToScarlet]

gordonbrown. I lied about the last one.

 

No you didn't, it's the new word for "starting well and full of promise but going rapidly downhill".

[Dominic M]

No you didn't, it's the new word for "starting well and full of promise but going rapidly downhill".

Yup, it's an uphill struggle.

[Richard Fairhurst]

Sorry WW!

 

Waterways World is wrong to miss the space out of the title of their heritage publication. Surely the ideal place to use the term in it's "historical context".

I can definitely see an argument for "narrow boat" for historic context and "narrowboat" for modern leisure craft. But the problem with that sort of thing is that you then get Lynne Truss wannabes who think you're not proofing your copy correctly because you have two different spellings, and they don't see the distinction. So I find it easier to stick with narrowboat.

 

(It's a bit like whether company names etc. should be referred to in the singular or plural: "British Waterways has decided" vs "British Waterways have decided". Henry Fowler, who forgot more than Lynne Truss has ever known, drew a subtle but sensible distinction which justified each in the right circumstances. But again, you try doing that, and you get complaints from the Trussalikes - "don't you know anything, it should always be 'its', kids these days etc. etc.". So I generally tend to go for "its" for a quiet life.)

 

As for our sister magazine... well, if I remember correctly, the "intercap" (or CamelCase, call it what you will) was an affectation of the masthead designer. Elsewhere in the magazine it was originally Narrowboat, I think, but after a couple of issues Hugh decided to be consistent with the masthead and write a cap B everywhere. Personally I'm not a great fan, but will grudgingly let it into WW!

 

To be honest it doesn't pay to be too picky about these things. I always laugh when you get people sneering at those who call it a "long boat", usually with some sniffy comment about Vikings. Actually, they were called long boats on the Severn...

Edited May 29, 2008 by Richard Fairhurst