Incorrect. I quote from Practical English Usage by Michael Swan, Oxford University Press, 1995:
Words which do not usually have plurals sometimes have an apostrophe when a plural form is written. It's a nice idea, but there are a lot of if's.
Apostrophes are used in the plurals of letters, and often of numbers and abbreviations. He writes b's instead of d's. It was in the early 1960's. (or ... 1960s.) I know two MP's personally (or ... MPs.) It is not correct to put apostrophes in normal plurals. JEANS -- HALF PRICE (not JEAN'S)
Clarity requirements have nothing to do with correctness. It's just rules, like etiquette, only partially based on logic of some sort and largely based on tradition.
I don't post on blogs much but I've heard that it was traditional to call people nazis so I'll try to abide by proper etiquette here: you're an apostrofascist.
For some reason the apostrophe thing does really irritate me. I've been known to say, "Contrary to popular belief, the apostrophe does not mean 'Look out, here comes the letter S!'" So I accept your epithet. But I'm not a grammar Nazi in general: for my part, I personally don't always follow the (American) rule that end punctuation marks always go inside quotation marks. Sometimes it just doesn't make sense.
Clarity is the most important thing, but unfortunately clarity is often most easily achieved through consensus.
A quick googling suggests that "apostrofascist" is an original term, (unless, as google suggests, Alla really meant to say that you were an astrophysicist.)
It's just rules, like etiquette, only partially based on logic of some sort and largely based on tradition.
*Ahem* As a big fan of the etiquette, I feel a need to speak up here. :) REAL etiquette is based on a very simple and clean logic - behave in a way that makes people around you feel more comfortable. Which means that anything labelled as "etiquette" that is about making people feel incorrect and small and gauche is not, in fact, REAL etiquette, but just snobbiness run amok and mislabelled. And that's the stuff that is only partially based on logic and largely based on tradition.
I think that's not a very good definition, because it's too general. Etiquette is specifically about making people feel more comfortable by not violating social norms at them. That's exactly what uniforall was doing - she was obeying the net social norm of calling people nazis, so that everybody would feel comfortable and at home.
The wikipedia article suggests that even in one society people have many conflicting ideas of what etiquette is, apparently including how to spell it. ("ettiquete"? nice editing! Is that what ettins do? I bet they have the most complicated table manners ever!)
Well, really, no usages require apostrophes for clarity. If they did, spoken English would have a way of distinguishing between apostrophized and non-apostrophized words. But it doesn’t — “cats” and “cat’s” are pronounced identically, as are “can’t” and “cant”.
The only exception I can think of is the possessive form of words ending in s — “Gus’s” is pronounced differently from “guss”. But it’s pronounced just about the same as “gusses”. So we could just drop the apostrophe entirely, spell possessives the same way we do plurals (add “s” for most words, “es” if the word otherwise ends in “s”), and rely on context to tell the difference, just like we do in speech, with no loss of clarity.
All we’d lose is the opportunity to feel superior about our knowledge of an irrelevant rule of punctuation.
Clarity is never required, I suppose, but more clarity is generally helpful. When used correctly, apostrophes help differentiate between things that are less differentiable (?) without them. When used incorrectly, they can make things more confusing. (An analogy with comments in programming immediately springs to mind.) Wouldn't it be better to have them used correctly than to do away with them entirely?
Clarity should be handled at the composition level — vocabulary and sentence structure. If you have to rely upon an apostrophe to make your sentence clear, you’ve built the sentence badly. (And what will you do if you have to read it out loud?)
In real life I’ve never once seen somebody honestly misread a sentence because an apostrophe was missing, or present when it shouldn’t have been. The actual reaction people always have, if they notice it at all, is more like Hah hah, an apostrophe error, whoever wrote that is stoopid! (or, alternatively, Arg, a stoopid apostrophe error, I hate that!). The actual intended meaning is always clear.
It's often the bellwether that the rest of the writing will have grammatical problems. As un unreconstructed apostrofascist, I find I have a more adversarial relationship with texts that fall down on this rule. I read them defensively, expecting at any time to have to stop my train of thought, repair the damaged trestle to the state the careless construction crew thought they left it in (based on my best guess), and attempt to get up a good head of steam for the rest of the trip. Like a ridiculously extended metaphor, sometimes it's not worth the bother.
On the other hand, I read Eats, shoots, and leaves about a week after I'd removed a rogue apostrophe from a bar's chalkboard advertisement about a block from my place in Jersey City, so I might be somewhat biased on the subject of The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation...
Well, sure, most people who can write well have internalized some sort of consistent version of the apostrophe rules (there’s a lack of consensus about certain matters, like plurals of words that aren’t usually pluralized, or plurals of acronyms, or the possessive forms of famous names of antiquity). And most people who haven’t internalized these rules are bad writers on the compositional level. But not all. There are quite a few authors who routinely fall down on matters of spelling or punctuation; that’s why publishers hire copy editors.
What I’m saying is if we all just agreed to stop with the damn apostrophes already, and gave ourselves a few decades to get used to it, we’d all be better off. For those few decades I’d be twitching just as much as you would.
Yeah, but he didn't explain "its" versus "it's". As far as apostrophe usage goes, contractions trump possessives: if something belongs to "it", it's "its".
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
'!
no subject
"I think you mean 'epiphany', Snee."
no subject
Words which do not usually have plurals sometimes have an apostrophe when a plural form is written.
It's a nice idea, but there are a lot of if's.
Apostrophes are used in the plurals of letters, and often of numbers and abbreviations.
He writes b's instead of d's.
It was in the early 1960's. (or ... 1960s.)
I know two MP's personally (or ... MPs.)
It is not correct to put apostrophes in normal plurals.
JEANS -- HALF PRICE (not JEAN'S)
no subject
no subject
Of course, that theory rather falls down for "aitch."
no subject
no subject
I don't post on blogs much but I've heard that it was traditional to call people nazis so I'll try to abide by proper etiquette here: you're an apostrofascist.
no subject
For some reason the apostrophe thing does really irritate me. I've been known to say, "Contrary to popular belief, the apostrophe does not mean 'Look out, here comes the letter S!'" So I accept your epithet. But I'm not a grammar Nazi in general: for my part, I personally don't always follow the (American) rule that end punctuation marks always go inside quotation marks. Sometimes it just doesn't make sense.
Clarity is the most important thing, but unfortunately clarity is often most easily achieved through consensus.
no subject
no subject
*Ahem* As a big fan of the etiquette, I feel a need to speak up here. :) REAL etiquette is based on a very simple and clean logic - behave in a way that makes people around you feel more comfortable. Which means that anything labelled as "etiquette" that is about making people feel incorrect and small and gauche is not, in fact, REAL etiquette, but just snobbiness run amok and mislabelled. And that's the stuff that is only partially based on logic and largely based on tradition.
Herein endeth the lesson. :)
no subject
The wikipedia article suggests that even in one society people have many conflicting ideas of what etiquette is, apparently including how to spell it. ("ettiquete"? nice editing! Is that what ettins do? I bet they have the most complicated table manners ever!)
no subject
The only exception I can think of is the possessive form of words ending in s — “Gus’s” is pronounced differently from “guss”. But it’s pronounced just about the same as “gusses”. So we could just drop the apostrophe entirely, spell possessives the same way we do plurals (add “s” for most words, “es” if the word otherwise ends in “s”), and rely on context to tell the difference, just like we do in speech, with no loss of clarity.
All we’d lose is the opportunity to feel superior about our knowledge of an irrelevant rule of punctuation.
no subject
no subject
In real life I’ve never once seen somebody honestly misread a sentence because an apostrophe was missing, or present when it shouldn’t have been. The actual reaction people always have, if they notice it at all, is more like Hah hah, an apostrophe error, whoever wrote that is stoopid! (or, alternatively, Arg, a stoopid apostrophe error, I hate that!). The actual intended meaning is always clear.
no subject
On the other hand, I read Eats, shoots, and leaves about a week after I'd removed a rogue apostrophe from a bar's chalkboard advertisement about a block from my place in Jersey City, so I might be somewhat biased on the subject of The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation...
no subject
What I’m saying is if we all just agreed to stop with the damn apostrophes already, and gave ourselves a few decades to get used to it, we’d all be better off. For those few decades I’d be twitching just as much as you would.
no subject
no subject
"Its" does not have a apostrophe for the same reason "his" does not. It's a special possessive form of a word, not a contraction.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject