The Apostrophe

[BillyJoe]

Just a question really, but it may lead down other pathways.

Which of the following is correct....

I have mine but do you have yours
I have mine but do you have your's

Where is Andys?
Where is Andy's?


Or am I in the wrong forum.


BJ

[69dodge]

"yours"
"Andy's"

Also, though you didn't ask, "its".

("It's" is a word too, but it means something else. It's an abbreviation for "it is".)

[Abdul Alhazred]

http://www.eesh.net/angryflower/bobsqu.gif

[El Greco]

Learning English as a foreign language presents numerous difficulties but the use of the apostrophe wasn't one of them, at least not for me. So I've been surprised to find out how many native English speakers have a problem with it. When I first started reading message boards I had to ask myself whether what I knew about the apostrophe was wrong; it turned out it wasn't.

[Kaylee]

This web site also has a nice short summary of the rules:

The Apostrophe Protection Society (http://www.apostrophe.fsnet.co.uk)

[BillyJoe]

Reading back, I realize that my question could have sounded like a plea for help rather than a test or puzzle.

Dodgy: You are correct.
Abdul: Wrong. You didn't address the question at all.
El: I am happy for you!
Shera: This site covers every aspect but.....

Can someone come up with a short sentence containing every example of the apostrohe (when to use and when not to use)

BJ

[Kaylee]

Originally posted by BillyJoe
Abdul: Wrong. You didn't address the question at all.
One out of two answers is not bad … to badly plagiarize Meatloaf and besides, you got a cartoon! I thought that was pretty good… :p

[BillyJoe]

Shera,

No. He got zero out of two questions. He didn't address either.
The cartoon's okay though.

bj

[Kaylee]

"The cat's feet are out of the bag." in the cartoon answers the question about whether it's:

Where is Andys?
or
Where is Andy's?

I'm glad you liked the cartoon! :)

[Kiless]

Sigh.

Give me a day and I'll send you my worksheet that I use with ESL students. It's 11.31pm and I'm not at work (although one time I found myself at work at 2am... don't ask...). But the links given to Apostrophe Protection Society seems cool and I recommend 'Eats, Shoots and Leaves' by Lynne Truss.

Heh - http://eatsshootsandleaves.com/ESLquiz.html - a game. :)

[Soapy Sam]

I shouldnt

I should'nt

I shouldn't

I should'n't

Which (if any ) is correct and why?

[drkitten]

Originally posted by Soapy Sam
I shouldnt

I should'nt

I shouldn't

I should'n't

Which (if any ) is correct and why?

None. Because you should.

[bigred]

Originally posted by El Greco
Learning English as a foreign language presents numerous difficulties but the use of the apostrophe wasn't one of them, at least not for me. So I've been surprised to find out how many native English speakers have a problem with it. When I first started reading message boards I had to ask myself whether what I knew about the apostrophe was wrong; it turned out it wasn't. You do have an issue with commas, however.

;)

[BillyJoe]

SS,

I should not => I shouldnot => I shouldn't
The apostrophe replaces the missing letter.


Shera,

Apologies. I have been doing this a bit lately. Hope it's not Alzheimer's. Presently I have banned myself form the puzzle forum for 1 week for being.....well, see my sig.....


BJ

[Kaylee]

Nah, blame it on stress. That's what I always do! ;)

Kiless, I liked the game! I did horribly the first time around though... :(. However, the book reviews for Eats, Shoots and Leaves said that there are grammar rules that are used in the UK but not in the USA -- and that thought made me feel better. ;)

Edited to remove score...

[BillyJoe]

I caught your score before your editing ;)
Nice to know I 'm not the only complete idiot :D

BJ


.....edited to remove Shera's embarrassing score. :D:D

[Kaylee]

lol. It was the stress. ;) I don't test well under stress... :)

[Iconoclast]

Originally posted by Shera
This web site also has a nice short summary of the rules:

The Apostrophe Protection Society (http://www.apostrophe.fsnet.co.uk)
That guide seems incomplete. Point 3 is "Apostrophes are NEVER ever used to denote plurals!"

According to the AP Style Guide, the plural of a single-letter noun should have an apostrophe for clarity, which is why we have the "Oakland A's" which would not be coherent without the apostrophe. Similarly, the cliche "mind your p's and q's".

Written English is really, really hard, I don't know how anyone manages to learn it as a second language.

[Soapy Sam]

Billyjoe- This confirms what I have suspected for some time.
You 're not a bloke in Australia at all. You are a sockpuppet of my girlfriend.

Observe- I should not. I shouldnot. (Note the absent space)
the " ' " marks the contraction. I should'not.
There follows a second contraction. (Birth is imminent)
I should'nt.
The second apostrophe marks the second event.
I should'n't...

...have started this.

We now have a structure possibly more complex and certainly harder to write than the original phrase. Some poor, overworked secretary drops the one " ' " at random, ending with the result you suggested.

The truth is there is no logic to this, no consistency, no reason.
We face the world of punctuation naked and alone.
This should not be so, but it is.

[BillyJoe]

SS

It shouldn't be should'n't should it, otherwise wouldn't would be would'n't....don't you think?....or do'n't you?

BJ

[Darat]

What is so difficult about using apostrophise correctly oh great teachers?

[bigred]

I don't know since your question makes no sense. Did you mean "apostrophes?"

[Darat]

Originally posted by bigred
I don't know since your question makes no sense. Did you mean "apostrophes?"

Yes it does, and no I didn't.

[bigred]

No it doesn't. Sorry.

apostrophise
v : use an apostrophe [syn: apostrophize]

Your sentence therefore essentially reads:

"What is so difficult about using using apostrophes correctly oh great teachers?"


It' no big deal; we don't expect proper Eng...er American from Brits either.

;)

[Darat]

Originally posted by bigred
No it doesn't. Sorry.

apostrophise
v : use an apostrophe [syn: apostrophize]

Your sentence therefore essentially reads:

"What is so difficult about using using apostrophes correctly oh great teachers?"


It' no big deal; we don't expect proper Eng...er American from Brits either.

;)

Well it would read that way for someone who doesn’t know the meaning of the word “apostrophe� and since it was only meant to be a slight play on words I'll take a moment to expand your knowledge by explaining it to you (all quotes are from the OED):

"Apostrophe" means two things the first is:

1. Reht. A figure of speech, by which a speaker or writer suddenly stops in his discourse, and turns to address pointedly some person or some thing, either present or absent; an exclamatory address. (As explained in Quintilian, apostrophe was directed to a person present; modern use has extended it to the absent or the dead (who are for the nonce supposed to be present); but it is by no means confined to these, as sometimes erroneously stated).

It's second meaning is the "omission of one or more letters" and apostrophize (or -ise) means:


1. Rhet. To address with or in a apostrophe,


Its second meaning is to "omit one or more letters".

So in a thread revolving around the meaning of the second definition I thought it would be mildly amusing to use the first definition to make a (mildly) amusing comment and also make my point in such a way that the sentence I constructed was in fact an apostrophe. (Obviously for you to have understand my comment you would have to know the full definition of “apostrophe� otherwise I suppose you would find it confusing.)

[BillyJoe]

Iconoclast,

Originally posted by Iconoclast
That guide seems incomplete. Point 3 is "Apostrophes are NEVER ever used to denote plurals!"

According to the AP Style Guide, the plural of a single-letter noun should have an apostrophe for clarity, which is why we have the "Oakland A's" which would not be coherent without the apostrophe. Similarly, the cliche "mind your p's and q's". I emailed John Richards.....

Dear John
Your site does not contain the following example of the use of the apostrophe:

Mind your p's and q's
(or Mind your P's and Q's)

BillyJoe
He replied as follows.....

Dear Billy Joe,
I do not believe apostrophes should be used in any plurals. The correct form, in my view, is "Mind your Ps and Qs" - although I would rarely use this in writing. Best wishes - John


Googling "Mind your Ps and Qs" or "Mind your ps and qs" gives 41,400 hits
Googling "Mind your P's and Q's" or "Mind your p's and q's" gives 24,200 hits

You are out-voted.


regards,
BillyJoe

[Kaylee]

Originally posted by BillyJoe
Iconoclast,

I emailed John Richards.....

He replied as follows.....
How nice that he actually responded, and so quickly too. This is a man that must take apostrophes very seriously!


Googling "Mind your Ps and Qs" or "Mind your ps and qs" gives 41,400 hits
Googling "Mind your P's and Q's" or "Mind your p's and q's" gives 24,200 hits

Good; one less thing to remember. :) Someone should tell Lynne Truss, the author of Eat, Shoots and Leaves. ;)

BTW I entered the following in the Google Search engine:
1960s got 19,400,000 hits
1960's got 5,100,000 hits

I had thought the latter was correct, but consistency is nicer.

[BillyJoe]

I have always written 1960s, so that does it for me....no apostrophe's for plural's in any circumstance's.

[bigred]

Originally posted by Darat
So in a thread revolving around the meaning of the second definition I thought it would be mildly amusing Think again.

;)

My bad, I suppose; I figured you were using the word in the sense that 99%+ of the English-speaking world use/understand it, and in the sense it was being used in this thread...ie vice a relatively obscure definition that is rarely used except perhaps in "niche" cliques (the theater, perhaps).

And it would still be grammatically incorrect anyway. It should still read:

"What is so difficult about using an apostrophe correctly oh great teachers?

[Darat]

Originally posted by bigred
...snip...

And it would still be grammatically incorrect anyway. It should still read:

"What is so difficult about using an apostrophe correctly oh great teachers?

I don't think my original use was grammatically incorrect but your version is certainly much betterer.

[Kaylee]

Originally posted by BillyJoe
I have always written 1960s, so that does it for me....no apostrophe's for plural's in any circumstance's.
LOL. Seriously, I'm quite concerned about the fact that I found this funny. I really have to do something about the quality of my weekdays...

[Lisa Simpson]

The Eats, Shoots and Leaves quiz was fun. I got 92%. I would have gotten 100%, but my finger stuttered on the mouse button.

[Iconoclast]

Originally posted by BillyJoe
I emailed John Richards.....

He replied as follows.....

Googling "Mind your Ps and Qs" or "Mind your ps and qs" gives 41,400 hits
Googling "Mind your P's and Q's" or "Mind your p's and q's" gives 24,200 hits

You are out-voted.

regards,
BillyJoe Hey man, correct grammar ain't no democracy. Thanks for emailing him, I never thought to do that.

As I said in my original post, adding an apostrophe to the plurals of single letter nouns is apparently in the AP style guide which is a pretty important reference, though I've been unable to find a copy online. You should have also asked Mr Richards about the Oakland Athletics (www.oaklandathletics.com). When I searched the other day I found one post that said the apostrophe was used because "A's" was just one big contraction, but all the other sources seemed to quote the AP guide.

I'd seriously like to know the definitive answer.

http://www.kvmlam.com/images/athletics.gif

[Iconoclast]

Originally posted by Shera
BTW I entered the following in the Google Search engine:
1960s got 19,400,000 hits
1960's got 5,100,000 hits

I had thought the latter was correct, but consistency is nicer. I learnt the former was correct, my examples with p's and q's et al was for specific cases where the meaning would be unclear without the apostrophe.

Here's a thought, can a "decade" be possessive? If so, then wouldn't I own a 1960's Chev be correct, the car belonging to the 1960s?

[Darat]

Originally posted by Iconoclast
I learnt the former was correct, my examples with p's and q's et al was for specific cases where the meaning would be unclear without the apostrophe.

Here's a thought, can a "decade" be possessive? If so, then wouldn't I own a 1960's Chev be correct, the car belonging to the 1960s?

No (that’s a very, very tentative "no", more like a "I haven't got a clue but I've got an opinion" sort of no).

Wouldn't it be a 1960s' Cheve?

[Lisa Simpson]

Originally posted by Darat
No (that’s a very, very tentative "no", more like a "I haven't got a clue but I've got an opinion" sort of no).

Wouldn't it be a 1960s' Cheve?

That's what I thought.

1960's Chevy would be a Chevy built in 1960.

1960s' Chevy would be a Chevy built during the decade of 1960-69.

Yes?

No?

[Iconoclast]

Originally posted by Lisa Simpson
That's what I thought.

1960's Chevy would be a Chevy built in 1960.

1960s' Chevy would be a Chevy built during the decade of 1960-69.

Yes?

No? I agree you.

I had a bit more of a google about the single-letter thing. Unfortunately, the AP Style Guide (actually it's the AP Stylebook (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0465004881/qid=1114700840/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/102-9580643-5719327?v=glance&s=books&n=507846)) is simply not available online for free, there is an online version but you need to subscribe to it and pay a fee.

I did find this (http://www.utexas.edu/coc/journalism/SOURCE/journal_links/AP_style.html) page on the University of Texas site which contains an abstract of the information in the AP guide. In the section titled "Numbers" it says:

University of Texas site
Plural forms: Numbers like 3s get the s but no apostrophe. (The same rule applies to decades: The 1920s.)
Single letters like K's get the s and an apostrophe.
Multiple letters like ABCs get the s but no apostrophe.

However, this (http://www2.ncsu.edu/ncsu/grammar/Apostro3.html) page from the North Caroline State University mentions something called the "Chicago Rule":

North Caroline State University site
The Chicago Manual of Style recommends that "so far as it can be done without confusion, single or multiple letters used as words . . . form the plural by adding 's' alone." The operative phrase here, of course, is "so far as it can be done with out confusion." This example is confusing. Let's read on. "Abbreviations with periods, lowercase letters used as nouns, and capital letters that would be confusing if 's' alone were added form the plural with an apostrophe and an 's.'" Result: C of A's.

The Chicago rule generates inconsistent forms for "the three Rs," and "straight A's." The Associated Press Stylebook and Libel Manual opts for consistency. In the category of "Single Letters" under "Plurals" it notes tersely, "Use 's. " Result: C of A's.

Lets face it, the rules of written English are a dog's breakfast.

[bigred]

Originally posted by Darat
I don't think my original use was grammatically incorrect but your version is certainly much betterer. Well finally.

Or as all the tech recruiters who email me regularly would say:

"You sound goodly."

[Kaylee]

Originally posted by Lisa Simpson
That's what I thought.

1960's Chevy would be a Chevy built in 1960.

1960s' Chevy would be a Chevy built during the decade of 1960-69.

Yes?

No?
Why a possesive and not an adjective? :confused:

[Nucular]

Originally posted by Iconoclast
Lets face it, the rules of written English are a dog's breakfast. Agreed - but when poor knowledge of the English dog's breakfast is applied to an even poorer knowledge of other languages, spectacular results can ensue.

My Dad, who's known for his remarkable emotional investment in the art of grammatical pedantry, reports having seen a sign above the freezer in a shop which advertised

GATEAU'X

:(

La breakfast de la chien, non?

[Jeff Corey]

So a panda goes to a restaurant and orders dinner.
What happens next?

[Darat]

He leaves.

(The voices made me post that.)

[BillyJoe]

As for using 's only when not doing so would look confusing, compare the following...

Mind your Ps and Qs

Mind your ps and qs

I think the former does not look confusing but the latter does.
The obvious solution would be to just use the former.


Also [b]Oaklands As[/i] does not look confusing in my opinion.

Likewise 1960s

As for a letter (or a group of letters) when you can't capitalize them - does anyone have any examples?


BillyJoe

[Mason]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Mind your Ps and Qs

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Lisa Simpson
That's what I thought.

1960's Chevy would be a Chevy built in 1960.

1960s' Chevy would be a Chevy built during the decade of 1960-69.

Yes?

No?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Why a possesive and not an adjective?

It's an adjective.

Taken as presented, the phrase says the Chevy belongs to 1960, or to the 1960s. This might sound correct, but actually means that the year 1960 owns the Chevy, which isn't what the phrase intends to say. It actually intends to say the car is from 1960, or from the 1960s, making 1960 an adjective. More specifically, 1960 is a noun (a place) being used as an adjective.

The reason this gets difficult is because 1960 does not have a distinct form for when it is used as an adjective. Further, since 1960 is a time period instead of an actual, physical, place that can be pointed to, it's easy to forget that (grammatically speaking) it is indeed a place.

So, the car would be "a 1960 Chevy" if it is from 1960, and "a 1960s Chevy" if it is from the 1960s, just like it would be "An American Chevy" if it were from America. Note that in the second case, 1960 is plural, not posessive, which is why it does not have an apostrophy.

It is certainly possible that common usage has caused the adjective form of 1960 evolve into "1960's", but I can't find a source indicating that this is the case. This falls into the same category as "Ps and Qs", so the apostrophy could be used if you feel it looks better. Just be consistant with that choice!

If anyone knows differently or disagrees, please speak up!

[BillyJoe]

Mason. Yes, it does sound like an adjective. Thanks for the insight. BJ

[sateenvarjo]

I'm all confused here. Is there another way to say that I like the music of the Sixties, or the dresses of the Fifties? Is 60s music/50s dresses correct? I'm not a native speaker.

[GlennB]

I am now unable to speak, as I don't know how to make apostrophe noises.

[JoeTheJuggler]

I'm all confused here. Is there another way to say that I like the music of the Sixties, or the dresses of the Fifties? Is 60s music/50s dresses correct? I'm not a native speaker.

'60s (the apostrophe takes the place of "19") is correct. I would also think 'sixties is OK, (though I would prefer sixties myself), but not 'Sixties. (Once it's capitalized, it's a different term. For example, the Gay Nineties.)

However, what's wrong is 60's (unless you mean something belong to "60") or the 1960's (unless you mean something belonging to 1960, as in "1960's Man of the Year").

Apostrophes should not be used to make plurals.

[John Jones]

Apostrope's are nothing more than a way of letting a reader kow that a letter 's' come's up next.

[The Atheist]

Apostrope's are nothing more than a way of letting a reader kow that a letter 's' come's up next.

Doesn't work with plural's apostrophes.

[JoeTheJuggler]

Nah. . .it's really a figure of speech, as in:

"Welcome, O life! I go to encounter for the millionth time the reality of experience and to forge in the smithy of my soul the uncreated conscience of my race."
--James Joyce, A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man

[GlennB]

Apostrophes should not be used to make plurals.

But then there's pragmatism ....

"Mind your Ps and Qs" is clear enough, but "Mind your As and Is" is confusing as the unapostrophised (?) versions look like words in their own right.

[NobbyNobbs]

So, the car would be "a 1960 Chevy" if it is from 1960, and "a 1960s Chevy" if it is from the 1960s, just like it would be "An American Chevy" if it were from America. Note that in the second case, 1960 is plural, not posessive, which is why it does not have an apostrophy.


Plural? Meaning there is more than one year 1960 in which cars were built?

Not to add another level of confusion, but which phrase would mean "the uniforms belonging to the Oakland Athletics"?

the As' uniforms
the A's' uniforms
the A's uniforms
the As uniforms

[Horatius]

Plural? Meaning there is more than one year 1960 in which cars were built?

Not to add another level of confusion, but which phrase would mean "the uniforms belonging to the Oakland Athletics"?

the As' uniforms
the A's' uniforms
the A's uniforms
the As uniforms



How about "The As's uniforms", which also has the added benefit of a built-in insult?

[JoeTheJuggler]

But then there's pragmatism ....

"Mind your Ps and Qs" is clear enough, but "Mind your As and Is" is confusing as the unapostrophised (?) versions look like words in their own right.

I think "Mind your As and Is" is confusing since it's not an expression I've ever heard of before. ;)

[GlennB]

I think "Mind your As and Is" is confusing since it's not an expression I've ever heard of before. ;)

"Count the letters - I think there are too many As and Is in this scrabble set"

[jmcvann]

Plural? Meaning there is more than one year 1960 in which cars were built?

Not to add another level of confusion, but which phrase would mean "the uniforms belonging to the Oakland Athletics"?

the As' uniforms
the A's' uniforms
the A's uniforms
the As uniforms

You would recognize that any of these constructions is awkward and spell out Athletics.

[Pup]

How about: the "A"'s' uniforms :D

There's an even more common situation than the Scrabble example. "Make sure you dot all your is and cross all your ts."

[commandlinegamer]

One could italicize:

the As and the Is

[Steve]

Well I told 'em right then", Fido said
"It should be easy to see
"The crux of the biscuit
is the apostrophe"

Frank Zappa - "Stink Foot"

My first thought when I saw the thread title. It's the Zappa geek in me. (Sorry for the derail)

[JoeTheJuggler]

One could italicize:

the As and the Is
That's what I would do. It's certainly preferable to using apostrophes.

Another option is to recast the sentence and talk about the "A tiles and the I tiles" in a Scrabble set.

[GlennB]

One could italicize:

the As and the Is

One could, yes. But why fret? The purpose of any language is to communicate effectively and perhaps, sometimes, interestingly or prettily.
There's nothing wrong with slipping in an apostrophe when it aids understanding in the written language. Here we're worried about how we 'shouldn't' create a plural with an apostrophe, when these words (A and I) are not nouns at all, they're representations of letters of the alphabet as spoken. Substitute H and H's in the example to illustrate. The proper spelling of that letter is aitch, so the plural would be aitches. Having already created a word out of thin air we can do what the hell we like with it to suit our purposes.

[ktesibios]

Why not just ask Bob the Angry Flower (http://www.angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif)?

[commandlinegamer]

In case anyone is unaware, this group can help:

http://www.apostrophe.org.uk/

[Almo]

Learning English as a foreign language presents numerous difficulties but the use of the apostrophe wasn't one of them, at least not for me. So I've been surprised to find out how many native English speakers have a problem with it. When I first started reading message boards I had to ask myself whether what I knew about the apostrophe was wrong; it turned out it wasn't.

My theory is that it comes from the rise of common items with acronyms. People thought that plural of a acronym noun got an apostrophe:

He has a lot of LP's.

This is not correct. It's

He has a lot of LPs.

But these were so common (LP, CD, VCR...) that it got a lot of traction, and people started using apostrophes for plural everywhere.

The mystery to me is why people started using "'s" for verb conjugation:

He run's a lot.

I wrote an article about it on my blog:

http://theaxenalmo.blogspot.com/2005/06/evolving-language.html

[Careyp74]

I have always written 1960s, so that does it for me....no apostrophe's for plural's in any circumstance's.

1960s is correct, there is no need for the apostrophe to separate a number and a letter. I use the apostrophe still to remove ambiguity. For example, I got five A's this semester.

[Careyp74]

I have a problem with saying it is used to denote a missing letter. We don't refer to it as a missing letter in my neck of the woods, we call it a contraction. Might be splitting hairs, however, what would you say about will not and won't?

ETA: here is a good site that covers written English pretty well
http://www.enchantedlearning.com/grammar/contractions/

[pgwenthold]

For some reason, this thread reminds me of something...

"One thing? I, like: about, Dear Miss Kinnian: (thats, the way? it goes; in a business, letter (if I ever go! into business?) is that, she: always gives me' a reason" when - I ask. She"s a gen'ius! I cou'd be smart like-her, Punctuation , is? fun!"
- Daniel Keyes, Flowers for Algernon