grammar wank which has nothing to do with theatre

[rm]

It has always been my understanding that when one makes a plural or other word or name ending in s possessive, one merely adds an apostrophe, not a second s because in the weird rules of English to do so is simply redundant in the face of the understood s.

This was something true in my education both at private and public school and in my tenure at the Associated Press.

It has recently come to my attention from several sources, however, that this is not universally true, and in fact is considered archaic in some quarters, mainly thanks to the Chicago Manual of Style, which it seems is a source of much contention amongst pretentious wankers everywhere. The writer C.J. Cherryh even has a tirade about it on her website which I am inclined to agree with (http://www.cherryh.com/www/panel_room.htm halfway down the page).

Certainly, I've been thrown for a massive loop by suddenly discovering that something I was always taught indicated an exceptionally embarassing lack of education is not only acceptable, but preferable in certain circles.

I mean if I saw the students's books in print, I'd immediately view it as an egregious typo, and a complete speedbump in my reading.

I don't care if it's archaic to say the students' books -- it looks and feels better.

Granted, I'm still feeling pissy about the imprecision of current uses of decimate both in terms of it meaning things not people, and percentages larger than ten, but that's apparently extra archaic. Also, growing up, anxious meant to be axcited and anticipatory, not nervous.

New words coming into the language I find to be awesome, but the deterioration of words and habits already there really disturbs me, as much as I'll grant those are personal rather than scholarly issues.

Comments

All typos thanks to so-called voice recognition.

[rothko.livejournal.com]

Dude, I refuse to believe that a single apostrophe is archaic. -s's Looks ridiculous, I don't care who says.

those 's

[ashabeth.livejournal.com]

my gods.... they have soooooo changed so called 'rules' about 's. Oy... if I see Students's books... um no. Students' books works fine. Just learn the damn rules you monkeys.

Oy.

She's Right

[keith418.livejournal.com]

It's a total outrage.

[chite.livejournal.com]

Strunk & White also uses s's.

It actually works in some instances, especially where you would repeat the "s" sound, as in "James's work." I was unhappy with it when I first found out about it--did go against what I was taught in school. I have since become a convert.

[askeladden.livejournal.com]

Heh. Was typing my comment before I saw yours. But, yeah. I think the repetition of the s sound is another good reason to add an s rather than simply apostrophizing. My friend Moss is all for it, at least, and I figure it's up to him to arbitrate on such matters.

[askeladden.livejournal.com]

What what? Last I heard (ok, Strunk and White ain't the cutting edge, exactly, but I'm not shifting until I get a damn good reason), plural nouns always get the simple apostrophe-after-the-s treatment; so it's students', cuttlefishes', Muggletonians', etc. -- but that proper nouns that end in s (except for certain classical or biblical ones, for tradition's sake -- Good friend, for Jesus' sake, forbear, that sort of thing) take apostrophe-s. Charles's tonsils. Goebbels's pinafore. It makes an infinite amount of sense, to me. Plurals have been altered by their plurality, so adding on the apostrophe only makes the word a possessive. Names, on the other hand, should be made possessive by a categorical apostrophe-s whether they end in s or not. Logical, innit? Now who on earth is saying otherwise? Do they have any reason, like, at all? 'Cause until they can convince me that they do, I'm with the Elements boys.

[editrx.livejournal.com]

Working professionally as a copyeditor since 1983 has me firmly in the camp with your last commenter. He's right on the money with what he's said. You'd be surprised how far back the possessive "s" goes, historically. I believe you can find the possessive "s" dating back as far as King Alfred, but I may be mistaken in my remembrance. (All my wonderful books are out in the office, and I'm too lazy a grammar wank to get off my butt and go out in the cold dark to reference them.)

[editrx.livejournal.com]

Her! It's a her and I am most humbly sorrowful for typing "him" and "his" when I knew damn well I was agreeing with a woman. Damn, I'm tired.

[askeladden.livejournal.com]

Hee! Don't worry; I'm flattered. (`;

Since I'm still on your list

[calieber.livejournal.com]

-s' for a plural is still correct. For a singular name ending in -s, well, it may be my boss's preference that I follow AP style on that, but doing it as -s' for any name is a pet peeve of mine -- that is, it's one of Charles's pet peeves.

[feyandstrange.livejournal.com]

Oh, I'm so with you and the estimable ms. cherryh on that one. My father just today asked me where he might find or buy a copy of the Chicago, and I started to rant rather embarrassingly. (Especially because I remembered that there were at least three really egregious horrors in the new chicago, but couldn't remember what any of them were!) It's enough to make me seriously consider using England as my 'primary' book publisher, just so any American copyeditors will have to either keep their damn dirty hands off my books, or at least give good reason for correcting my grammar. Grr.

[kalyx.livejournal.com]

I agree completely. s' is correct, dammit! That is what I was taught also and the other way annoys me to no end.

Apparently, this topic is disucssed in length in the book: Eats, Shoots & Leaves which is about grammar. I caught a discussion with the author on cable recently and need to get the book as it sounds really great. And apparently, I am the kind of geek that reads books about grammar evolving in culture.

[rm.livejournal.com]

I'm that sort of geek too -- my parents bought me The Transative Vampire in fifth grade and my social life never recovered.

[schpahky.livejournal.com]

I learned the single-s-apostrophe growing up and have also been recently confused and crankified, grammatically.

I don't like all these extra s'. A bit overwrought.

[baldanders.livejournal.com]

Wait, there's two different things going on here. A singular ending in s acceptably takes apostrophe-s, absolutely. Davis's letter, the bus's exhaust. But I have never heard of a plural ending in s taking apostrophe-s. The students' report cards, definitely, not the students's report cards. Does Chicago Manual really say otherwise? Good lord, I hope not.

[rm.livejournal.com]

A singular ending in s takes apostrophe-s seemingly everywhere except AP style is what I've just learned via this discussion, which makes sense, as newspapers are about fititng as much info into small spaces as possible.

Chicago manual really says otherwise about plurals (it says a lot of other nasty crap too). We should burn it.

No no no!

[jothanbar.livejournal.com]

Aristophanes's plays.
Aristophanes's students' plays.
That is how it is and always shall be. I'm glad that there are other people who get overwrought about grammar and punctuation.

[random-goblin.livejournal.com]

This reminds me of the first time I went through American customs. Upon being asked "do you speak english?" my American friend told them, "he's English, he speaks better English than you...". This cannot in all honesty be said to have speeded up the customs process... leading to such worrying moments as
Customs: "have you been arrested for smuggling drugs before?"
Me: "what do you mean before?"
Customs: frowns and makes notes

Fortunately I had a pair of mickey mouse boxer shorts in my luggage, which convinced them I was a worthwhile citizen and America welcomed people like me... (I thought it would have been churlish to point out that actually I'm a subject, not a citizen... and actually from my experience America hates people like me ... Atheist book reading scum that I am.)

Oh and yes you're right about seeing "students's" in print, it fills one with about as much confidence as someone unable to distinguish "their" from "they're". Once "American English" is referred to as "American" perhaps I'll stop feeling physically ill every time I read some new "improvement". After all deviations in French bother me not at all (well ok, just not very much).