Kinsmans? Kinsmen? 10-25-09

[B the Hiker]

This was an AMC trip, and I was very worried that there would be ice above the hut on Fishin' Jimmy or on the ridge. We had brought microspikes, but I had a fear there would be a very thin layer of ice that would be enough to be slippery but not deep enough for spikes to dig into.

Fortunately the weather was mild (42 at the hut), and the sun poked out now and then, and between that and all the rain from Saturday, the trails were completely clear of ice.

There was a lot of water on the trails. A lot. We saw virtually no signs of ice save for two or three tiny little clusters, and the trails are in nice condition.

Our only encounter of note was a group of four at Lonesome Lake, directly across from the hut, who had built themselves a nice fire as we were hiking down! I went over and explained that there were no fires near the water, and in a foreign accent a young man replied in a snotty voice that he thought that was a very silly policy, at which point I explained he could tell that to the officer who would be waiting for them in the parking lot if they didn't extinguish the fire immediately. An older gent in an Israeli army jacket seemed genuinely not to know that they couldn't build a fire--despite being all of 50 yards from a huge sign saying just that--and he extinguished it.

All in all we felt very lucky for the nice weather on Sunday, and I am grateful the conditions were safe, because that would have been a very hairy trip otherwise.


Brian

 

[erugs]

Thank you for speaking up to them and making sure they listened and understood.

And I like your question about the name of the two peaks together!

 

[bikehikeskifish]

I always say Kinsmans. Here's why:

They are named after Nathan Kinsman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsman_Mountain). If you had him and his family over for dinner would you say

"We had the Kinsmans over for dinner last night."

or

"We had the Kinsmen over for dinner last night."


?

Tim

 

[erugs]

True.

I'd probably say "We had the Kinsman family over for dinner."

 

[Dr. Dasypodidae]

I always say Kinsmans. Here's why:

They are named after Nathan Kinsman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsman_Mountain). If you had him and his family over for dinner would you say

"We had the Kinsmans over for dinner last night."

or

"We had the Kinsmen over for dinner last night."


?

Tim

LOL, as I have always wondered about this one myself!

Or, would you say

"We had the Kinsman's over for dinner last night."

 

[Dr. Dasypodidae]

I always say Kinsmans. Here's why:

They are named after Nathan Kinsman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsman_Mountain). If you had him and his family over for dinner would you say

"We had the Kinsmans over for dinner last night."

or

"We had the Kinsmen over for dinner last night."


?

Tim

LOL, as I have always wondered about this one myself!

Or, would you say (or write)

"We had the Kinsman's over for dinner last night."

 

[erugs]

You could say Kinsman's and be correct, but some people always have trouble with " 's " and try to avoid the situation whenever possible.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

If Kinsmans is plural (which is the point of the discussion, right?), then possessive plural is Kinsmans'. As in

We had the Kinsmans' over for dinner last night.

What do they own though?

If instead I said "We went over to the Kinsmans' for dinner last night" the implied possessive is 'house'.

Then you get into Davis, Davis', Davises, Davises' as in the Davis Path (or Thom Davis)...

"We got together with the Davises at the Kinsmans' house for an after-hike drink."

Tim

 

[nartreb]

Hm, I think the proper term for both peaks is "Kinsman Mountain" (though there's some support for "Mt Kinsman"). Distinguishing the peaks is a later (AMC peak-list) invention; "North Kinsman" is not an official name.

But if you did have two mountains named "Kinsman", there's no rule against pluralizing in the usual way: "Kinsmen." For some reason this seems odd to some people, so "Kinsmans" is acceptable too. But "Kinsman's" is just plain wrong.

Surprised nobody quoted this one yet:

My dear Bagginses and Boffins, he began again; and my dear Tooks and Brandybucks, and Grubbs, and Chubbs, and Burrowses, and Hornblowers, and Bolgers, Bracegirdles, Goodbodies, Brockhouses and Proudfoots. 'ProudFEET!' shouted an elderly hobbit from the back of the pavilion. His name, of course, was Proudfoot, and well merited...

 

[bikehikeskifish]

If you want to indicate that the Kinsmans attended a dinner with you at your house, then say:

"We had the Kinsmans over for dinner."

There's no need for the apostrophe.

However, if you attended dinner at the Kinsmans' (house), then, exactly as you said:

"We went over to the Kinsmans' for dinner last night."


(I'm bowing out of this one now...this has taken on a life of its own...yikes!)

Right, which is why I said "What do they own?" NOTHING - it's wrong.


On my USGS map (TOPO! 4.5) it is shown as Kinsman Mountain and South Peak.


Tim

 

[giggy]

I think I know why I am not a member of the AMC and wouldn't fit in well on an AMC trip...

rather than tell them there would have been an officer waiting for them if they didn't put out the fire, I would have whipped a beer out of the pack and joined them...

to each their own - thats just what would I would have done..

 

[Dr. Dasypodidae]

I was just joking about the "We had the Kinsman's over for dinner last night." Hence, the . I had just completed reading a bunch of student papers, so thought that I would toss that one out there to see if I could get a response. We have a much better educated bunch on the board here than I am teaching in my classroom.

Also, the other classic this past week has been the "Whose your daddy" chant at Yankee Stadium. Although chanting Yankee fans can be excused, not those who put words to paper, er the Internet.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091029164453AAhgqHz