The Apostrophe

[woodelf]

If you were to abbreviate words into letters, e.g. Compact Discs or Detective Constables, would you use the possessive apostrophe, CD's and DC's or just use CDs and DCs? Ta Muchly.

[boxtops]

..or perhaps that should be Ye's.....

[jeffa]

:-)

You see it everywhere, not just on AB. People who say that they were born in the 1930's or that someone died in her 90's.

[sunny-dave]

I blame the parent's ...

[chrissa1]

The CD's attractive cover made me buy it, ie, the cover belonging to the CD.

[jeffa]

Well obviously, Chrissa! But that doesn't mean that the CD in question was amongst a whole rack of CD's with attractive cover's. :-)

[New Judge]

There is no general confusion with apostrophes and as has been mentioned they are used to denote plurals and can be used to denote that letters are missing.

The whole area is not quite the mess that Hopkirk suggests. Bishop’s Stortford is correct. The town's name stems from the fact that in 1060 William, Bishop of London, bought the Stortford manor and estate for eight pounds. Hence it is the Stortford that belongs to the Bishop. The fact that some search engines and the like cannot find it with an apostrophe is their shortcoming. If something belongs to James, it is James’s (in the same way that something belonging to Hopkirk is Hopkirk’s). Just because a name ends with an ’s’ does not mean the rules need to be altered. James’ means something belonging to many people named Jame. (Imagine a family of Smiths. “It is the Smiths’ house).

Quite easy really.

[Khandro]

woodelf; It depends also on the context, you would say 'Two Detective Constables walked into the room ' because it is plural (more than one), but The car was the Detective Constable's, the apostrophe standing for 'his' ; The detective Constable [his] car.

[Hopkirk]

Normally New Judge I find you very accurate, but on this I disagree.

Although I don't like or agree with the rule, I stand by what I first said.

If something belongs to James it can be described as James's or James'.

That is the very reason I pointed this out. The rules are far too complicated.

I looked into this because my son's name ends with an s (not James, but I use that as an example).

A teacher had put an apostrophe but no s after his name when describing him possessing something. I was sure, like you, that this was wrong.

I investigated but I found it can be done either way.

[factor-fiction]

>Possessive - apostrophe. Plural - no apostrophe

That doesn't work with the possessive its, though. It doesn't work with yours or hers either

[Peter Pedant]

Khandro - the is an eighteenth century mistake originating possibly with Samuel Johnson

The apostrophe is the possessive'genitive represents an 'i' and is an Anglo Saxon inflection. All the Anglo Ssxon inflexions dropped off because there were unstressed short vowels. I think a few survive in Chaucer.

Even in the eighteenth century people were protesting that Jane Austen's book could not possible be Jane Austen his book
because she was a 'she' and not a 'he'

Doesnt explain genitive plurals - doctors' offices etc.

Altho they had in C18 'his' and 'her' - they didnt have a word for belonging to a thing. So they made one up - 'its'.

Historical linguistics - fascinating but doesnt pay the rent

[DaisyNonna]

Apostrophe redundant