advertisement


'Nasty evil @%$kers. . .'

Hazelberry said:
FIFY. The possessive apostrophe is in almost all cases a needless anachronism. It’s only “set in stone” out of the inertia of printing convention. It’s good to see it dying in casual communication & I expect a time when it disappears entirely 👍
Click to expand...
It has its place in communication and clarity. Get it wrong and the meaning could be misunderstood. Viz: "The soldier's only weapon was a single rifle" c.f. "The soldiers' only weapon was a single rifle.". In the first case one soldier has only a rifle, which isn't too disastrous. In the latter case more than one soldier is having to share one, which is a much worse position.
 
Will somebody let me know when someone actually, you know, engages with the point in the OP. I don’t think we’ve yet had a post discussing the Tory proposals to persecute the homeless. But perhaps that’s because there’s nothing to be said? Tories gonna Tory.
 
wulbert said:
I don't like to see other, ordinary people referred to as "scum". It's de-humanising and othering.

I've learned quite a lot from Tory-voting people on these pages. It's given me a better understanding of their outlook on life. I hope that none of them even remotely support what this current shower of unspeakables are doing.

You don't get an honest political debate with a Tory voter because they won't articulate what they really think ("Are you thinking what we're thinking?") knowing it to be morally repugnant, and also because many have never really thought/cared that deeply about anything other than their own self-advancement. In my opinion.
Click to expand...
Well said. It’s symptomatic of the whole them and us messaging. It encourages those fortunate enough to believe they are “chosen”, or that their own hard work created their life, and then to classify swathes of society as feckless. I’m not saying people don’t work hard or capitalise on opportunity when they see it, but it’s hugely about the mind set, upbringing and peer group to be able to do so.

The job of humanity should be holding out a hand to help, not drawing up the ladder behind them.
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
Will somebody let me know when someone actually, you know, engages with the point in the OP. I don’t think we’ve yet had a post discussing the Tory proposals to persecute the homeless. But perhaps that’s because there’s nothing to be said? Tories gonna Tory.
Click to expand...
You've answered your own question. Sometimes there is nothing else be say.
 
Jubal said:
Well said. It’s symptomatic of the whole them and us messaging. It encourages those fortunate enough to believe they are “chosen”, or that their own hard work created their life, and then to classify swathes of society as feckless. I’m not saying people don’t work hard or capitalise on opportunity when they see it, but it’s hugely about the mind set, upbringing and peer group to be able to do so.

The job of humanity should be holding out a hand to help, not drawing up the ladder behind them.
Click to expand...
You just described The American Dream. If you work hard enough you'll make it.
 
stevec67 said:
It has its place in communication and clarity. Get it wrong and the meaning could be misunderstood. Viz: "The soldier's only weapon was a single rifle" c.f. "The soldiers' only weapon was a single rifle.". In the first case one soldier has only a rifle, which isn't too disastrous. In the latter case more than one soldier is having to share one, which is a much worse position.
Click to expand...
I did say in almost all cases. I agree with the plural usage you point out. Also, I feel 's (or just an apostrophe) is needed for words & names ending in -ss like "business" where -sss just seems a tad unweildy.

It's funny that while in German there's nearly always no apostrophe usage to show possession, it seems the influence of English causes some native speakers to insert it there, particularly in personal, place, & brand names. They call it the "idiots apostrophe".
 
So which is worse: not using an apostrophe where one is called for, or adding an apostrophe where one is not appropriate?
 
Hazelberry said:
I did say in almost all cases. I agree with the plural usage you point out. Also, I feel 's (or just an apostrophe) is needed for words & names ending in -ss like "business" where -sss just seems a tad unweildy.

It's funny that while in German there's nearly always no apostrophe usage to show possession, it seems the influence of English causes some native speakers to insert it there, particularly in personal, place, & brand names. They call it the "idiots apostrophe".
Click to expand...
You did say almost all cases, but you also called for it to be abolished! I was answering the latter. We do suffer the grocer's apostrophe here too. In French and I think other Latin languages they avoid it by using "car of my neighbour" form.
 
stevec67 said:
You did say almost all cases, but you also called for it to be abolished! I was answering the latter. We do suffer the grocer's apostrophe here too. In French and I think other Latin languages they avoid it by using "car of my neighbour" form.
Click to expand...
No I didn't.
 
I am of the opinion that it is better to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous apostrophes than to desist from calling Tories abominable names.
 
stevec67 said:
"It's good to see it disappearing... and i predict a time when it will disappear altogether" is as good a call for abolition as I've seen this week.
What else does it mean if not a call for abolition?
Click to expand...
Abolition suggests placing a ban on the mark. I'm not calling for that at all. I'd like to see it simply fade away, & I think it will.
 
I take a stubborn stance on successive sounds, so there !
narabdela said:
There's a very simple rule. "If you don't know how to use an apostrophe, don't use an apostrophe."
Click to expand...
But why is is so difficult to use? There's only one anomaly to the rule that the POSSESSIVE apostrophe goes after the relevant noun and that, for obv. reasons, is in the case of IT to avoid confusion with the apostrophe of OMISSION, which is simply inserted to denote letter(s) missing (as in contractions). ( ITS= possession; IT'S = omission) This does trip as many people up as the errant greengrocer's apostrophe.

I agree with Hazelberry in that there are so many occasions where either apostrophe is ignored in modern technological forms of communication that it might appear to be 'fading out'. However, as these aberrations are made due to haste, ignorance or lack of due care and attention, I see no reason why apostrophes should be cast onto the grammatical rubbish heap. They are part and parcel of identifying meaning in text.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top