|
Uneasy
May 16, 2008 18:44:11 GMT
Post by Paul Doherty on May 16, 2008 18:44:11 GMT
I do mention usage which isn't settled at the very end, and use apostrophised names as an example, so I think that's OK. I've added a "No Apostrophe" section now, but I am a bit concerned we're making it too long and complex! eng-lang.co.uk/apostrophe_rules.htm
|
|
|
Uneasy
May 16, 2008 19:44:36 GMT
Post by Sue M-V on May 16, 2008 19:44:36 GMT
I've added a note, Sue. See what you think.
Perfect! The information seems now to be growing multiple heads! Perhaps it should be divided into Beginners, Intermediate and Advanced! At least it might bring people into the discussion when they see that there are no very simple answers to many of the aspects of apostrophe use. I reacted a bit to your "none of them have apostrophes" (rather than "none of them has an apostrophe") but that's because I'm very old fashioned! I teach the "correct" form but always with the qualification that most people would use a plural verb in such a case. It's just that if people need to have total confidence in the information, perhaps it should be written according to accepted educated convention - or has the convention now changed? Or are we assuming that the educated minority won't be checking the information anyway? Sue
|
|
|
Uneasy
May 16, 2008 22:17:36 GMT
Post by Barry on May 16, 2008 22:17:36 GMT
It looks brilliant to me, Paul. Many thanks!
|
|
|
Uneasy
May 16, 2008 23:17:10 GMT
Post by Paul Doherty on May 16, 2008 23:17:10 GMT
perhaps it should be written according to accepted educated convention It should indeed be (and it now is). Not an intentional decision on my part, that's simply how I wrote it. Thank you , Sue.
|
|
|
Uneasy
May 16, 2008 23:18:22 GMT
Post by Paul Doherty on May 16, 2008 23:18:22 GMT
Thanks, Barry. Let's hope Google likes it as much. The more links to it the better.
|
|
|
Uneasy
May 17, 2008 3:59:19 GMT
Post by Geoff on May 17, 2008 3:59:19 GMT
In the section 'Where do I put the apostrophe?', I have trouble with the example:
Six children's shoes = six shoes of children.
Whenever I read 'Six children's shoes' I read 'the shoes of six children'. Does anyone else have a problem with the example?
|
|
|
Uneasy
May 17, 2008 5:09:20 GMT
Post by SusanB on May 17, 2008 5:09:20 GMT
I couldn't help reading "six shoes of children" in the same way that I would read "six boxes of eggs" (my mental image has six large shoes, each full of children).
I agree with Geoff on the "six children's shoes" (a pile of twelve small shoes - potentially more if some of the children have more than one pair of shoes).
I have real difficulty in interpreting either of these in the way that they are intended, even though I know how to work it out!
Susan.
|
|
|
Uneasy
May 17, 2008 9:32:43 GMT
Post by Dr Mildr on May 17, 2008 9:32:43 GMT
In the section 'Where do I put the apostrophe?', I have trouble with the example: Six children's shoes = six shoes of children. Whenever I read 'Six children's shoes' I read 'the shoes of six children'. Does anyone else have a problem with the example? Yes. I'd also interpret it as 'the shoes of six children'. It seems to me to be one of the occasions where I'd write what I meant in full (as it were!) to minimise confusion.
|
|
|
Uneasy
May 17, 2008 10:21:25 GMT
Post by Dave M on May 17, 2008 10:21:25 GMT
I'd read it the same way, Geoff - we automatically apply a number to the following noun, unless the sentence or word-paring strongly guides us otherwise.
|
|
|
Uneasy
May 17, 2008 13:15:42 GMT
Post by Sue M-V on May 17, 2008 13:15:42 GMT
Whenever I read 'Six children's shoes' I read 'the shoes of six children'. Does anyone else have a problem with the example?
Isn't this a bit of a red herring? I mean, does it matter how many children or shoes, as long as we all understand that they're (both) plural? It's not the maths that's the problem. Sue
|
|
|
Uneasy
May 17, 2008 14:21:06 GMT
Post by Dave M on May 17, 2008 14:21:06 GMT
Yes, it matters, Sue! The point is that someone who is of analytical bent will read the example and have to stop and figure out whether the apostrophe is before the ess because children is plural-but-without-an-ess-ending, or because there are several shoes, and-anyway-is-children-plural-here-? (because we have six shoes and no stated number of children)...
They will then unpick all of that, in a process which says: 1 the numbers here look confusing 2 there is no singular meaning possible for "children", that word form being always plural, therefore ... 3 we have several children 4 being already plural, "children" takes the apostrophe ess 5 the number of shoes is irrelevant to the formation of the apostrophe 6 BUT ... the "six" could apply to either the children or the shoes 7 If I take it to apply to the children ... I get the apostrophe ess construction 8 If I take it to apply to the shoes ... I get the aostrophe ess construction 9 It didn't make any difference - the numbering was irrelevant.
Now, not everyone will go through that (though people like me will!). On behalf of those others, I ask: why choose an example which makes me go through steps 1, 2, 6, 7, 8 and 9?
|
|
|
Uneasy
May 17, 2008 16:06:19 GMT
Post by Barry on May 17, 2008 16:06:19 GMT
Yup. I pointed this one out on page 1, I think! It could be six shoes, or an unspecified number (but most probably a multiple of 12) of shoes belonging to six children. It matters because it isn't just a matter of maths, it's a matter of attribution; the shoes example isn't so crucial (although it might be if we were considering storage space, Imelda!), but there might be circumstances where it makes a real difference: to a transplant co-ordinator (and several anxious sets of recipients and their families), the availability of six donors' kidneys needs careful unpicking!
|
|
|
Uneasy
May 17, 2008 16:37:41 GMT
Post by Paul Doherty on May 17, 2008 16:37:41 GMT
|
|
|
Uneasy
May 18, 2008 0:14:37 GMT
Post by Sue M-V on May 18, 2008 0:14:37 GMT
Oh well, I must have said elsewhere (several times) that numbers mean very little to my poor, addled brain! You can appreciate what a handicap that is!
Sue
|
|
|
Uneasy
May 19, 2008 19:45:06 GMT
Post by TfS on May 19, 2008 19:45:06 GMT
Is it taboo to use hyphens to eliminate the confusion of the children and their shoes? If there are six children with shoes, then why not "six-children's shoes"? Or, with the other meaning where there are six shoes belonging to children, "six children-shoes". Only asking TfS
|
|