Quizzes & Puzzles27 mins ago
punctuation
22 Answers
Any punctuation experts out there? Should there be an apostrophe in the word Hallowe'en ? I feel that there should be. Does anyone know?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by buffer. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
No apostrophe in Halloween in modern english; it is a proper noun.
http://dictionary.reference.com/features/halloween.html
http://dictionary.reference.com/features/halloween.html
The Oxford English Dictionary, both in print and online, gives Hallow-e'en (ie with both an apostrophe AND a hyphen) whilst Chambers Dictionary gives Hallowe'en. These two publications are generally regarded as the authoritative sources for British English though, under American influence, the hyphen is slowly disappearing almost everywhere. Accordingly, I would say that the Chambers version is the modern way...Hallowe'en.
I should point out that dictionary.com - as linked-to by Tamborine above - is hosted by ask.com, a business based in Oakland, California. Consulting it, therefore, gives you meanings/spellings in AMERICAN English. If that is what you are looking for, perfectly fine, but be aware that...
"England and America are two countries divided by a common language." (George Bernard Shaw)
"We have really everything in common with America nowadays except, of course, language." (Oscar Wilde)
"England and America are two countries divided by a common language." (George Bernard Shaw)
"We have really everything in common with America nowadays except, of course, language." (Oscar Wilde)
The society you crave, nightmare, already exists.
The Association for the Abolition of the Aberrant Apostrophe (AAAA) was founded by the late Keith Waterhouse. The association’s main aim was the elimination of the “Greengrocers’ Apostrophe” (Apple’s, Pear’s, Cue’s, Banana’s).
This new association quickly absorbed the far less well known Society for the Abolition of the Spurious Apostrophe (SASA) which I founded and which, until its absorption by AAAA, had just one member (me). SASA suffered from a very low profile which Mr. Waterhouse, with his journalistic connections, was able to remedy and I was more than happy to see my fledgling society finally gain the recognition it so richly deserved.
The apostrophe must be unique in being simultaneously the most misunderstood, misused, under used and over used punctuation device ever.
The Association for the Abolition of the Aberrant Apostrophe (AAAA) was founded by the late Keith Waterhouse. The association’s main aim was the elimination of the “Greengrocers’ Apostrophe” (Apple’s, Pear’s, Cue’s, Banana’s).
This new association quickly absorbed the far less well known Society for the Abolition of the Spurious Apostrophe (SASA) which I founded and which, until its absorption by AAAA, had just one member (me). SASA suffered from a very low profile which Mr. Waterhouse, with his journalistic connections, was able to remedy and I was more than happy to see my fledgling society finally gain the recognition it so richly deserved.
The apostrophe must be unique in being simultaneously the most misunderstood, misused, under used and over used punctuation device ever.
apostrophes will probably vanish altogether over the next century or so. Very few people (mostly older ones) know how to use them properly, they get in the way in texting, and in the end they don't usually make that much difference. They haven't got much reason to survive.
(If I'd said "they dont usually make that much difference. They havent got much reason to survive", would anyone have misunderstood me?)
(If I'd said "they dont usually make that much difference. They havent got much reason to survive", would anyone have misunderstood me?)
I myself am all for the apostrophe AND the hyphen in general usage. Get rid of these and we're half-way to spelling yacht as yot!
Even now, after many experiences of seeing the word in American contexts, I still read coworker as cow-orker. That's because there is NO hyphenless word in British English opening with the letters c.o.w. where these are NOT pronounced cow as in cattle. Does cowrite imply authors working together or a cattle ritual?
As for the apostrophe, does "the dogs paws" refer to one dog or many dogs? Yes, I know context will help but why abandon something which is actually helpful in conveying meaning?
Long may both apostrophes and hyphens reign!
Even now, after many experiences of seeing the word in American contexts, I still read coworker as cow-orker. That's because there is NO hyphenless word in British English opening with the letters c.o.w. where these are NOT pronounced cow as in cattle. Does cowrite imply authors working together or a cattle ritual?
As for the apostrophe, does "the dogs paws" refer to one dog or many dogs? Yes, I know context will help but why abandon something which is actually helpful in conveying meaning?
Long may both apostrophes and hyphens reign!
ABerrant, the words in parentheses were the same as in the preceding paragraph, except I removed the apostrophes. Did the lack of apostrophes make them harder to read?
Quizmonster is of course right to note that apostrophes, like hyphens, have their uses, but that may not save them. Sometimes convenience triumphs over grammatical or philological sense. I wouldn't even mind yachts being yots - why not? [Or why nacht?] The word's in our language now, not Dutch. A classic example you'll be aware of, Quizmonster: Johnson plumped for 'deign' and 'disdain', having modernised the spelling of one but forgotten to do so for the other. Is the latter 'wrong' because it no longer shows its Latin roots? I don't think so - I've never been tempted to spell it 'disdeign'.
Sorry, buffer, wandering a bit far off topic here.
Quizmonster is of course right to note that apostrophes, like hyphens, have their uses, but that may not save them. Sometimes convenience triumphs over grammatical or philological sense. I wouldn't even mind yachts being yots - why not? [Or why nacht?] The word's in our language now, not Dutch. A classic example you'll be aware of, Quizmonster: Johnson plumped for 'deign' and 'disdain', having modernised the spelling of one but forgotten to do so for the other. Is the latter 'wrong' because it no longer shows its Latin roots? I don't think so - I've never been tempted to spell it 'disdeign'.
Sorry, buffer, wandering a bit far off topic here.
Well, J, you are, of course, right in claiming that we have lost sight of the historical roots of many words but, to me at least, that is no reason at all to hasten the process along. I for one don't want ever to have to spell cruise - from Dutch kruisen - as crooz just because that might make things easier for some.
rap over the knuckles for the Great Cham, then, Quizmonster! But personally, I think the great divide between spelling and pronunciation is one of the language's weaknesses, and have no problems when occasionally they move a bit closer (as, for instance, hiccup has almost entirely replaced hiccough).