Posted Oct 15, 2002 by Smiley Ben
I've always been taught that whilst it is optional to add an 's' to bus' (i.e. the bus's wheels), you should never add it to something with a double s already... So Ross's would be wrong and should always be rendered Ross'.
So I say always go for the elegant, never adding an extra 's' option.
But then of course there are those that claim the rule is that you must *always* add an 's', except for the case where there is already a double s, and that this is the case which has caused all the confusion....
But in case we mind any of these, surely some note should be made about the people, who can surely only be described as pure evil, who think it's acceptable NOT to add an 's' if the word ends in 'z'. So 'I was hit by the fuzz' truncheon'. ARGH!
|
 
|  | |
|
|
Posted Oct 15, 2002 by Gnomon [See A60420098 for details of new sign-in system]
I myself always add apostrophe S to a singular word ending in S. So I say Mrs Jones's wisdom, even though Mrs Jones herself (Wand'rin Star) denies that there should be an s there and she's a grammar teacher!
My reasoning is that you pronounce the s so you should write it. You actually say Jónzuz, not Jónz.
In the other case, where the word ends in an s because it is plural, you don't say any extra s. You say "the pigz noses" and not "the pigzuz noses", so it should be pigs'.
|
| | |
|
|
Posted Jan 5, 2003 by Researcher 213915
I was taught not to use the apostrphe at all with inanimate objects - say "the wheels of the bus" instead. Fuzzes can still have truncheons, though!
|
| | |
|
|
Posted Jan 9, 2003 by Uncle Heavy [sic]
but saying 'the bag of mrs jones' is odder than 'mrs jones' bag'
the reason we didnt conclude the matter in the article is because people disagree on it
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
Key |  |  |
A: An older reply to the parent Posting
B: The parent Posting, to which this is a reply
C: A newer reply to the parent posting
D: The first reply to this Posting
| | |
Click on this icon to make a complaint about a specific Posting | |
Home
Reply
