Click here to play

Apostrophe

1 2
   Share on Facebook  
Cool Breeze  #414581  Wed, 05 Sep 07 04:04 PM
 Alienvoord wrote:
You don't have to agree, but the fact is that these are standard uses.

If a noun ends in s, the standard plural ending is es. It makes no difference whether the noun is a common noun or a proper noun:

She bought a dress.
She bought two dresses.
(NOT: dress's)

CB
  
Top 50 Contributor
Joined on Fri, Apr 7 2006
Helsinki, Finland
Senior Member (2,849)
Proficient SpeakerTrusted Users
The coldest winter I ever spent was a summer in San Francisco.- Mark Twain
Alienvoord  #414635  Wed, 05 Sep 07 05:33 PM
 Grammar Geek wrote:

It's highly nonstandard in my experience. Granted, different countries have different styles.

You say that "The Davis's are all coming to dinner" is the correct way to write something that says that the entire Davis family is coming?



It is a standard variant, according to the Oxford Companion to the English Language. You'll have to take it up with them. Smile [:)]

 Cool Breeze wrote:
 Alienvoord wrote:
You don't have to agree, but the fact is that these are standard uses.

If a noun ends in s, the standard plural ending is es. It makes no difference whether the noun is a common noun or a proper noun:

She bought a dress.
She bought two dresses.
(NOT: dress's)

CB


Yes, but with family names, apostrophe-s is a standard variant: Jones's. Altho this is not as common as the variant without the apostrophe.
  
Top 200 Contributor
Joined on Tue, Jul 25 2006
Toronto
Full Member (315)
I'm a Canadian English speaker
Cool Breeze  #414664  Wed, 05 Sep 07 07:24 PM
 Alienvoord wrote:
[
It is a standard variant, according to the Oxford Companion to the English Language. You'll have to take it up with them. Smile [:)]

Most interesting, Alienvoord. I don't think I'll be able to take this plural up with the authors of the book, but would it be too much trouble if you, please, quoted verbatim what the book says about plurals like Jones's? You'd do a language enthusiast a big favor.

Regardless of what it says, I won't change my mind, though. I think it's plainly wrong.Smile [:)]

CB
  
Alienvoord  #414786  Thu, 06 Sep 07 12:05 AM
---
There was formerly a respectable tradition (17-19c) of using the apostrophe for noun plurals, especially in loanwords ending in a vowel (as in We do confess Errata's, Leonard Lichfield, 1641, and Comma's are used, Philip Luckcombe, 1771) and in the consonants s, z, ch, sh, (as in waltz's and cotillions, Washington Irving, 1804). Although this practice is rare in 20c standard usage, the apostrophe of plurality continues in at least five areas: (1) with abbreviations such as V.I.P.'s or VIP's, although such forms as VIPs are now widespread. (2) With letters of the alphabet, as in His i's are just like his a's and Dot your i's and cross your t's. In the phrase do's and don'ts, the apostrophe of plurality occurs in the first word but not the second, which has the apostrophe of omission: by and large, the use of two apostrophes close together (as in don't's) is avoided. (3) In decade dates, such as the 1980's, although such apostrophe-free forms as the 1980s are widespread, as are such truncations as the '80s, the form the '80's being unlikely. (4) In family names, especially if they end in -s, as in keeping up with the Jones's, as opposed to the Joneses, a form that is also common. (5) in the non-standard ('illiterate') use often called in BrE the greengrocer's apostrophe, as in apple's 55p per lb and We sell the original shepherds pie's (notice in a shop window, Canterbury, England).
---
- The Oxford Companion to the English Language page 75

What's so wrong with some variation anyway?
  
Cool Breeze  #414931  Thu, 06 Sep 07 09:23 AM
 Alienvoord wrote:
What's so wrong with some variation anyway?


Many thanks, Alienvoord. I have never seen plurals like Jones's used in modern English, but if they are palatable to native speakers, it only adds to the colorfulness (and confusion) of English. Actually, variation is what I often look for in English. The extremely rigid word order is one hindrance to that.

I get the impression from the quotation that the authors have an aversion to two apostrophes in one word. I wonder how they would write: He is a friend of the Joneses'. 

He is a friend of the Jones's. He is a friend of the Jones's'.
(?)

Never mind. Smile [:)] This apostrophe of plurality is a good example of the state English is in at the moment owing to there not being a Language Academy that would have disposed of some of the fascinating confusion. Perhaps it's best this way. Thanks again for taking time to quote from the book.

CB
  
Alienvoord  #415083  Thu, 06 Sep 07 03:47 PM
You're welcome!

I wouldn't say they have an aversion to two apostrophes in one word. I think they're just describing the fact that we usually don't put two apostrophes in one word - except for fo'c'sle.
  
1 2
AddThis Feed Button RSS Feed: ESL Linguistics Discussion Forum
© 2008 MediaCET Ltd.
Terms and Conditions & Terms of Service