Armand M. Nicholi, M.D., Jr.? Should it be "Armand M. Nicholi. Jr, M.D.?

Forums: English, Esl, Grammar, Language
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Because M.D. refers to Medicinae Doctor.

Context:

Armand M. Nicholi, M.D., Jr. is a clinical professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and the Massachusetts General Hospital. His clinical work and research has focused on the impact of absent parents on the emotional development of children and young adults. He is the editor and coauthor of the classic The Harvard Guide to Psychiatry (3rd edition, 1999). He was also a founding board member of the Family Research Council.

More:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armand_Nicholi

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 1 • Views: 2,548 • Replies: 28

No top replies

@oristarA,

Yes; it shud be:
Armand M. Nicholi, Jr., M.D.

Delete the . after Nicholi and add a . after Jr

Make it: Jr.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Armand M. Nicholi Jr, M.D.

Like that, right?
Otherwise it looks like Armand is a Junior Doctor.
Joe(heh)Nation

3 Replies

@Joe Nation,

Joe Nation wrote:

Armand M. Nicholi Jr, M.D.

Like that, right?
Otherwise it looks like Armand is a Junior Doctor.
Joe(heh)Nation

Can imagine that a clinical professor of Harvard is a JD.

Thank you both.

0 Replies

@Joe Nation,

Yeah.

Hamish McTag Sen.

0 Replies

@Joe Nation,

Joe Nation wrote:

Armand M. Nicholi Jr, M.D.

Like that, right?

Jr needs a . after it.

Joe Nation wrote:

Otherwise it looks like Armand is a Junior Doctor.
Joe(heh)Nation

Is that like a pediatrician ?

David

0 Replies

Every once in awhile David gets something right.

2 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

Every once in awhile David gets something right.

That shud be:
"Every once in a while David gets something right."

0 Replies

I accept your right to differ, David. You are not, however, right, except of course politically, very very far right.

And what on earth is "shud"? Clearly it SHOULD rhyme with bud, dud, crud, and mud, but there isn't any such word as that.

1 Reply

I partially take that back. You were also right about Oristar's question.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

Every once in awhile David gets something right.

I shud to think.

Do you think that he's right in this case, MJ? Are you sure this time?

0 Replies

wrt oristar, yep

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

Are you sure, MJ? You were out to lunch last time.

0 Replies

and quite a tasty lunch it was too, had you been around I might have asked you to join me. incidentally, what are you talking about?

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

incidentally, what are you talking about?

By your own admission, you haven't declared Om "right" all that often, MJ, so I would surmise that it was the last time you did so. Can't you remember that occasion?

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

I accept your right to differ, David.

That 's BIG of u.

MontereyJack wrote:

You are not, however, right, except of course politically, very very far right.

Thank u. I do my best.
I worked n voted for Barry Goldwater

MontereyJack wrote:

And what on earth is "shud"? Clearly it SHOULD rhyme with bud, dud, crud, and mud,
but there isn't any such word as that.

There is no logical reason to jam Ls into wud, cud nor shud.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

There is no logical reason to jam Ls into wud, cud nor shud.

Most certainly there isn't, Om. That would leave us with three more equally misspelled words - wuld, culd, shuld.

Another fine example of OmSig "logic".

1 Reply

JTT asks:

Quote:

Can't you remember that occasion?

No, frankly, I can't. It happens so rarely. I know I have, though. It's like, you know you've driven someplace before and you know you've parked your car around that place before. But you have no idea if you drove there on March 3, 1983, and if you did you have no idea where you parked your car then. Save with David. I know he was right once before about something, and I know it was definitely not something that had anything to do with guns, but I have no recollection of what it was.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

My bad, MJ. It was the rarity of being right thing that threw me. It wasn't Om, it was Ticomaya.

0 Replies

@JTT,

DAVID wrote:

There is no logical reason to jam Ls into wud, cud nor shud.

JTT wrote:

Most certainly there isn't, Om. That would leave us with three more equally misspelled words - wuld, culd, shuld.

Another fine example of OmSig "logic".

This time, I will accept your reasoning, J.
I did not address the o in those words; I was lazy.
In my opinion, we 'd be better off dumping them along with the Ls
and just go with wud, cud & shud. Its faster n easier.
Its good for future generations.

However, your point was well taken as a strict matter of logic.
Good work, J.

David

1 Reply

Armand M. Nicholi, M.D., Jr.? Should it be "Armand M. Nicholi. Jr, M.D.?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know