From a WSJ opinion lamenting the state of Manhattan Chinese food (of all things):
Walk through New York's Chinatowns—there are two—and you'd think that the Chinese don't know about fine dining. Here it's all about shared tables at food stalls and loud, crowded dining halls that feel trapped in an era when Mao was still alive. Well, let me tell you: There are plenty of Chinese people with money, and they like to spend it on things besides U.S. Treasurys.
Is "Treasurys" an accepted spelling of "Treasuries"? I find the typo - if such it is - somewhat amusing, but I'm more than willing to confess my own ignorance if that's the case. A quick Google suggests that "ies" is the way to go, does anyone else have an opinion?
Update: an answer!
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
Treasurys has always been the way the WSJ has spelled it; it’s not a typo.
I believe it is actually the “correct” way, but over the years, “Treasuries” has also become acceptable.
I still use “Treasurys” in my writings. Is the plural of “monkey” not “monkeys?” It certainly isn’t “monkies.”
I’m confused by your example – “Treasurys” is certainly not the plural of “Treasury;” Rather, “Treasuries” is the correct spelling.
The plural rule for words ending in “y” is to just add an “s” when the letter before the “y” is a vowel and to drop the “y” and use “ies” when the letter before the “y” is a consonant.
So:
Treasury -> Treasuries because of the “r” before the “y”.
Monkey -> Monkeys because of the “e” before the “y”
With that said, it may be that the WSJ has adopted the archaic spelling (e.g. “monies”) nonetheless.