2007-12-24 23:27:39 · 11 answers · asked by cpranab 1 in Education & Reference ➔ Words & Wordplay
Directors General I think. I took the mothers-in-law as an example for the plural form of Mother-in Law. I think that it follows the same concept. :-)
2007-12-24 23:37:52 · answer #1 · answered by gem 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Directors General
2007-12-25 07:36:58 · answer #2 · answered by reynwater 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Directors- General
2007-12-25 07:31:14 · answer #3 · answered by iamsuranovi 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Director-Generals
2007-12-25 07:31:20 · answer #4 · answered by Tony A 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Director-Generals
2007-12-25 07:29:33 · answer #5 · answered by harishsatishchandra 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Directors-General.
This is because the "specific title" is Director and the "qualifier" is General.
As a rule of thumb you could turn the thing around and call someone a General Director (a less-classy way of saying Director-General). The plural form of that is General Directors. See, it works.
If you said Director-Generals then you would have spoken nonsense.
The same rule applies to things like Court Martial (pl = Courts Martial).
2007-12-25 07:36:09 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Definitely, directors-general.
2007-12-25 07:37:34 · answer #7 · answered by getafix 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Directors-general.
There are more directors of a general nature.
2007-12-25 07:31:42 · answer #8 · answered by jinoturistica 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Directors-General
Hope this helps.
Merry Christmas
Lisa
2007-12-25 07:30:38 · answer #9 · answered by Lisa 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I would use: Directors-General
2007-12-25 07:30:23 · answer #10 · answered by nutsfornouveau 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋