Is this correct?

[richardsol]

Hi - Is this use of apostrophe correct?

Wharton Business School in 2007 published an article comparing the Anglo-American system of corporate governance with that of Japan's.

Thanks

Richard

[jjg1]

Oct 19, 2012 23:32:13 GMT richardsol said:

Hi - Is this use of apostrophe correct?

Wharton Business School in 2007 published an article comparing the Anglo-American system of corporate governance with that of Japan's.

Thanks

Richard

Richard

There are many experts on this forum (I'm not one of them) but my view would be that although it may not be wrong, the apostrophe and the following "s" are unnecessary; the "of" in front of Japan makes it possessive, so the subsequent possessive 's is not required.

I think it would be ok to say "... with that of Japan".

jjg1

[Geoff]

Richard,

What is really being said in your quoted passage is:

Wharton Business School in 2007 published an article comparing the Anglo-American system of corporate governance with that of Japan's (system of corporate governance).

What I've enclosed in brackets is obviously not written, but is understood. Since Japan owns that system of corporate governance, the apostrophe is necessary.

I do not like jig1's suggestion that it would be OK to say "... with that of Japan" as the comparison would be between apples and oranges, a comparison between a system of corporate governance and (the country of) Japan.

[Dave Miller]

I think you've got a bit tangled up there, Geoff.

I agree that the second thing being compared is Japan's system of corporate governance but your expanded sentence doesn't make sense. What is the first thing being compared?

The following all seem to work (I've simplified the start of the sentence, for clarity):

• We compared the Anglo-American system of corporate governance with Japan's system of corporate governance.
  
• We compared the Anglo-American system of corporate governance with Japan's.
  
• We compared the Anglo-American system of corporate governance with that of Japan.
  
• We compared the success of the Anglo-American system of corporate governance with that of Japan's (system of corporate governance).
  

The first three compare system with system. The fourth refers to something belonging to the Japanese system, though, and needs to compare with something belonging to the American one.

[Dave]

We do use the double possessive:

• He is a friend of John's. (He is John's friend.)
  
• He is a friend of John. (He is John's friend.)
  
• He is a friend of mine. (He is my friend.)
  
• He is a friend of the family's. (He is the family's friend.)
  
• He is a friend of the family. (He is the family's friend.)

Some have a better ring to them than others. For instance,

He is a friend of me.

doesn't work as well! And "He is a friend to me" has a different meaning.

The suggestions proffered may remove some ambiguity, but whether of Japan's or of Japan is used, the meaning is probably understood my most--until micro-analysis sets in!

[richardsol]

Thanks! This feedback is really useful. Wonderful!

[Geoff]

Oct 20, 2012 8:22:00 GMT Dave Miller said:

I think you've got a bit tangled up there, Geoff.

Exactly how do you think I've got a bit tangled up? When you force me to rethink the original question, I can only assume it's the use of 'that of' in the original sentence. I would have to agree my whole response, including my comment regarding jig1's response, is possibly wrong because, on re-examination, 'that' is a pronoun standing for 'system of corporate governance'.

[hubertus]

Dave Miller, Re your option 3:
We compared the Anglo-American system of corporate governance with that of Japan.
I think it is by far the best version as it avoids the apostrophe of possession altogether.

[Dave Miller]

... on re-examination, 'that' is a pronoun standing for 'system of corporate governance'.

That's it exactly, Geoff.