|
|
Post by Ted on Jun 2, 2019 20:05:20 GMT
Hi
I am having a debate about whether/where to place an apostrophe in the paediatric ward - is it childrens ward, children's ward or childrens' ward.
Your thoughts please....
|
|
|
|
Post by Verbivore on Jun 2, 2019 21:13:30 GMT
Hello, Ted.
Children "own" the ward (i.e. it is of, to, for, by, with, or from children). An apostrophe of possession follows immediately the "owner", hence children's.
|
|
|
|
Post by pmailkeey on Oct 22, 2019 14:08:43 GMT
Hello, Ted. Children "own" the ward (i.e. it is of, to, for, by, with, or from children). An apostrophe of possession follows immediately the "owner", hence children's. But the children don't own the ward; similarly the accounts don't own the Accounts Department. 'children' and 'accounts' are mere labels to identify the ward or department. As per www.eng-lang.co.uk/apostrophe_rules.htm |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Miller on Oct 22, 2019 16:17:41 GMT
Perhaps it's easier to think of the ward "belonging to" the children. In the sense of that's the ward they use, or have. Nothing to do with legal ownership!
A "possessive apostrophe" doesn't mean legal ownership, it just refers to the kind of relationship that involves of, to, for, by, with or from - as Verbivore says.
Another way to see it:
childrens ward - doesn't make sense, as there's no such word as childrens.
childrens' ward - ward belonging to childrens. And there's no such word as childrens ...
(Accounts department DOES work, as there IS such a word as Accounts.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Verbivore on Oct 22, 2019 18:56:08 GMT
Hello, Ted. Children "own" the ward (i.e. it is of, to, for, by, with, or from children). An apostrophe of possession follows immediately the "owner", hence children's. But the children don't own the ward; similarly the accounts don't own the Accounts Department. 'children' and 'accounts' are mere labels to identify the ward or department. As per www.eng-lang.co.uk/apostrophe_rules.htmpmailkeey: You misread the information on that site, from which I quote. "Note that we can often use for instead of of – shirts for the men. The possessive is much a looser concept than ownership: the girls may not own the school, but it's still a girls' school." Dave's post above reinforces that, and my, stance. (Thanks, Dave.) |
|
|
|
Post by Stripeyterrier. on Nov 5, 2019 12:51:38 GMT
Thread title. Should it be "The Cowleys effect" or "The Cowleys' effect"?
The Cowleys are two brothers in this instance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Miller on Nov 5, 2019 15:23:42 GMT
Can you give us more background, and the full sentence? It will help.
If you are talking about a famous effect that the Cowleys have produced or identified, so famous that the effect gets a name, I'd call it the Cowley Effect (singular - because both brothers are called Cowley).
If you are talking about the effect they have had in just one instance, then the apostrophe follows the "s": The Cowleys' effect on Saturday was very noticeable.
If "effect" is a verb, there's no apostrophe: Whenever they enter the room, the Cowleys effect a brilliant resurgence of optimism.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on Dec 3, 2019 0:49:35 GMT
But the children don't own the ward; similarly the accounts don't own the Accounts Department. 'children' and 'accounts' are mere labels to identify the ward or department. It's a department of accounts, and a ward of children. By all means argue for adjectival usage in this case - Children could be a label, just as Accounts is. But you'd be arguing for Children Ward - your argument (and the "Apostrophe Rules" webpage which you quote) doesn't support the nonsensical Childrens Ward. I know what accounts are, but what are childrens? |
|
