5

Does use of the salutation

Dear Drs. Apple and Banana,

imply that Dr. Apple is married to Dr. Banana? That is, would it be better form to use:

Dear Dr. Apple and Dr. Banana,

when Dr. Apple and Dr. Banana are unrelated, but happen to both be addressed in the same letter?

Hugo
  • 67,535
merv
  • 153

3 Answers3

11

There is no implication of marital status in your first example. It's just a more compact way to say the same thing.

I could question whether two fruits could legally be married in the first place, but that would probably lead to downvotes.

Spehro Pefhany
  • 10,419
  • 4
    Yes, I agree. I think the first example is fine. It just sounds wrong because they have been given such silly names. But if I wrote to a medical practice saying 'Dear Drs Wright and Jenner, Further to my earlier letter...', that sounds quite alright. – WS2 Mar 15 '14 at 17:15
  • 6
    Doubtless there are some people in America still using the dated slang fruit for homosexual, so from their benighted perspective, in some states fruits can indeed be legally married. But the state of Illinois recently refused to allow someone to marry a vegetable, so the age-old fruit/vegetable distinction may yet have legs. – FumbleFingers Mar 15 '14 at 17:15
  • @FumbleFingers: ROTFL – Canis Lupus Mar 15 '14 at 17:17
  • 1
    @FumbleFingers Thank you for "benighted" -- "in a state of pitiful or contemptible intellectual or moral ignorance, typically owing to a lack of opportunity". A worthy component of any repertoire of insults. – Spehro Pefhany Mar 15 '14 at 17:24
  • @Spehro: Since I would seriously not expect even the most incompetent native speaker to address a letter to "Dear Drs X and Y" (or even say something like "Allow me to introduce Doctors Masters and Johnson"), I'm not keen on the implications of your "just a more compact way to say the same thing". But even though I'm a bit iffy about upvoting you because of that, I'm gonna assume you deliberately set up the "fruit" double-entendre, so have the +1 anyway! :) – FumbleFingers Mar 15 '14 at 18:32
  • @FumbleFingers Why would you not use that form? It gets used all of the time. AmE? – David M Mar 15 '14 at 18:34
  • @David: Forgetting about the abbreviated written version (which would obviously clash with Mrs = Mistress/Missus anyway) have you ever heard anything like "Allow me to introduce Misters Smith and Jones"? I certainly haven't, and the idea that one could justify doing this for "Doctors" but not "Misters" seems far-fetched to me. – FumbleFingers Mar 15 '14 at 18:42
  • @FumbleFingers It comes up quite frequently for me (being a doctor). And, yes, I hear it all of the time. Have you not heard/used the term Messrs. – David M Mar 15 '14 at 18:44
  • 3
    Isn't Dr Apple a contradiction in terms? – Edwin Ashworth Mar 15 '14 at 18:51
  • 1
    @EdwinAshworth Dr. Jim Apple could be a French doctor. – Spehro Pefhany Mar 15 '14 at 18:55
  • @David: To my mind, Messrs. is an extremely dated form that was only ever used where the two (or more) people being thus identified were part of a known "unit". I accept that in certain circumstances where "Doctor" is being used to identify the profession of two or more individuals, it wouldn't be ridiculous to pluralise and specify it only once. But in OP's context it's clearly part of the honorific associated with each doctor. I maintain that since no-one actually does this with "Misters" in speech, doing this with "Doctors" is just ignorant. – FumbleFingers Mar 15 '14 at 19:02
  • @FumbleFingers If you are going to introduce 5 doctors, it seems time consuming to say "Let me introduce Dr. A, Dr. B, Dr. C, Dr. D, and Dr. E." But, in introduction we frequently say: "May I introduce: Drs. A,B,C,D, and E." But, again, I guess it's personal preference rearing its ugly head again. We'll have to agree to disagree. – David M Mar 15 '14 at 19:11
  • @EdwinAshworth I know it's a joke, but I don't get it. I've known more than one Dr. Apple. And, even a Dr. Appel. – David M Mar 15 '14 at 19:13
  • @David: It's probably just personal preference, as you say. But given that in the UK we don't normally use Doctor as an honorific (it's usually just Mister), I suppose there might be something of a UK/US split. – FumbleFingers Mar 15 '14 at 19:19
  • @FumbleFingers I thought that was merely for surgeons. That you routinely called physicians Doctor? – David M Mar 15 '14 at 19:21
  • @David: True. For no particular reason, I've simply been assuming that was the context. – FumbleFingers Mar 15 '14 at 19:27
  • FumbleFingers, @DavidM: I'm confused re: titles for surgeons and doctors in BrE. Are you saying that surgeons are called 'Mr Apple' but all other physicians 'Dr. Apple'? And if so, FF, why would you assume that 'surgeons' is the context when all that's being used is the title 'Dr'? – Mitch Mar 15 '14 at 20:20
  • @Mitch that is correct. My understanding is that it dates back to the distinctions of the 18th century in England. Surgeons were typically technicians who didn't require a medical degree. Compare that with barbers who were often called short-coated surgeons and performed blood lettings, etc. See also – David M Mar 15 '14 at 20:30
  • @EdwinAshworth It only took me more than an hour: An apple a day keeps the doctor away. Well played. – David M Mar 15 '14 at 20:33
  • 1
    @DavidM At least you got the je m'appelle one instantly. – Spehro Pefhany Mar 15 '14 at 21:03
  • @SpehroPefhany Nope. Hahahaha. – David M Mar 15 '14 at 21:06
  • @DavidM You get a free ticket when I start playing the clubs. Mind you, you'll probably be the only one in the audience :-) – Edwin Ashworth Mar 15 '14 at 22:24
  • @SpehroPefhany Jim Apple, a French doctor? Sounds more like a pom to me. (I admit I hadn't got your French pun, though). – Edwin Ashworth Mar 15 '14 at 22:28
  • @Mitch: Historically, the most common type of surgery was amputation. Not only might that be seen as contrary to a directive to "do no harm", but in the days before power tools, a doctor's time may have been too valuable to waste on such a task. Barbers were expected to have considerable skill with a knife, and at removing that which was unwanted (e.g. hair) without removing that which was wanted (the underlying skin), and would thus be better suited to the tasks surgeons were typically required to perform. – supercat Mar 16 '14 at 19:15
4

It doesn't imply their marital status at all. No more so than Messrs. Jones and Wilson implies that they are in a homosexual union.

I would use the term Drs. X and Y.

But, there are certainly situations where you will need to address a married couple of doctors.

My wife and I experience this all of the time. She hasn't taken my last name, and we're both physicians.

She is Dr. N, and I am Dr. M.

I frequently get letters addressed to:

"The Doctors M" (incorrect due to her preference).

Doctors (or Drs.) M (incorrect due to her preference, again.)

Dr. and Mrs. M, (technically correct, but she finds it offensive).

Dr. and Dr. M (again incorrect based upon her preference).

Drs. M and N (Works well, no offense taken by anyone).

Dr. M and Dr. N (Also works well, no offense taken by anyone).

My personal preference is for Drs. M and N. I think it flows better. And, keeping up with the sexist traditionalism: Male first, female second. It keeps with the Mr. and Mrs. convention, and many will assume it to be so.

The other side-effect of her not having taken my name: I get called Mr. N frequently on vacation when a hotel's phone system brings the name up. Drives me batty.

Community
  • 1
David M
  • 22,515
1

My preference would be for Dear Dr. Apple and Dr. Banana, because it clarifies and does not offend.

edn13
  • 67
  • That is a perfectly reasonable choice. But, in what way do you feel the other to be unclear? – David M Mar 15 '14 at 22:58
  • Both are Dr.A and Dr. B. In my case, my husband and I receive invitations for Profs D and N, but only he is a tenured prof while i'm an adjunct (and lecturer, and librarian) so - no fair - and -no flattering either, from my perspective. Does this answer your question? – edn13 Mar 17 '14 at 17:40
  • It does. But, my point was to round out your answer and explain how you felt the other unclear or offensive, etc. (It's sort of the site's standard for answers.) – David M Mar 17 '14 at 17:45
  • I found it potentially prone to erroneous interpretations: as I said, one of the spouses does not necessarily be a doctor but be covered by the first, shortened version of the salutation. Thanks for asking for clarification – edn13 Mar 31 '14 at 16:37