Forum:Apostrophe-S!

Forums: Index > The World that Never was > Apostrophe-S!

Neumannz — Yeah, well, I don't care what the FBI, CIA, RGB and XFL say! I already returned the priceless paintings that were evidence! TALK — No one must see this. DELETED! — 21:50, December 1, 2009 (UTC)   Ok, guys, this is getting bloody obnoxious. IT'S OK TO HAVE "apostrophe-s" AFTER A SINGULAR NOUN ENDING WITH "s"! As always, my sources is the all-knowing (citation needed) Wikipedia. Since we appear to be using this convention (Ventus's, Xemnas's, etc.) we should try to stick with it—unless of course there's an unresonable stink about it... Anyway, that's my two cents.

DoorToNothing — I dreamed last night... I got on the boat to Heaven! And by some chance, I had brought my dice along! — 23:25, December 1, 2009 (UTC) Firstly, could you please change your font-type? That's incredibley difficult to read when you thrown in apostrophes and quotations. The proper English grammar is to use such terms as Xemnas's, Roxas's, Ventus's, Lexaeus's, etc. You would use the apostrophe after the /s/ only when the term in possessive form is plural, meaning more than one. So, you would so such only in the case of terms such as Shadows', worlds', bosses', Keyblades', characters', games', images', etc. If this is not already in the Manual of Style, I need to add it in there, because this is probably the worst grammar mistake that is used far too commonly on this wiki.

Yer mom - SOMOS HOMBRES O PAYASOS!!!! TALK - 00:00, December 2, 2009 (UTC) As Kate said in here it is NOT a mistake, it's merely a difference in opinions and writing styles. While learning English in elementary school I was taught both ways so I really don't mind. I do think there was some concensus about keeping it the "words's" way so it should be added to the MoS, to avoid moar conflict

BebopKate - This one is Zazzles...because he's Zazzy! TALK - Here's your cat...and here's your $20...00:01, December 2, 2009 (UTC) Ironically, in that very same article, it also points out it is okay not to add an "s" after a singular possessive. I was actually taught not to add an s in that case by most of my teachers because it "looks sloppy". If you guys feel the need to make a rule in the MoS, that's fine, but be aware that this is one of those grammatical conventions that can be observed differently from place to place and person to person. Please don't drive yourself crazy over it. And we wonder why English is so hard to learn? ^_^

Neumannz — Looks like I'm gonna have to jump...! TALK — I work alone! Except when I work with Xion...which is all the time. — {{{time}}}   I don't.

DoorToNothing — I dreamed last night... I got on the boat to Heaven! And by some chance, I had brought my dice along! — 00:31, December 2, 2009 (UTC) I'm going to throw that into the MoS, just because this has caused several conflicts in the past. Plus, it seems to be the way that most of us were taught. I personally think that the ignorant editors who continue to use "Xemnas'" and "Ventus'" are just sloppy with their grammar. And English is the most difficult language to learn. We have so many exceptions to the rules that it makes learning our language difficult... like this exception to the rule, for example.

KrytenKoro - Click TALK - This subsection deals with singular nouns pronounced with a sibilant sound at the end: /s/ or /z/. The spelling of these ends with -s, -se, -z, -ze, -ce, -x, or -xe. Many respected sources have required that practically all singular nouns, including those ending with a sibilant sound, have possessive forms with an extra s after the apostrophe. Examples include the Modern Language Association and The Economist.[14] Such sources would demand possessive singulars like these: Senator Jones's umbrella; Mephistopheles's cat. On the other hand, some modern writers omit the extra s in all cases, and Chicago Manual of Style allows this as an “alternative practice”.[15] Generally, Chicago Manual of Style is in line with the majority of current guides, and recommends the traditional practice but provides for several exceptions to accommodate spoken usage, including the omission of the extra s after a polysyllabic word ending in a sibilant.[16] Rules that modify or extend the standard principle have included the following: * If the singular possessive is difficult or awkward to pronounce with an added sibilant, do not add an extra s; these exceptions are supported by The Guardian,[17] Emory University's writing center,[18] and The American Heritage Book of English Usage.[19] Such sources permit possessive singulars like these: Socrates' later suggestion; James's house, or James' house, depending on which pronunciation is intended. * Classical, biblical, and similar names ending in a sibilant, especially if they are polysyllabic, do not take an added s in the possessive; among sources giving exceptions of this kind are The Times[20] and The Elements of Style, which make general stipulations, and Vanderbilt University,[21] which mentions only Moses and Jesus. As a particular case, Jesus' is very commonly written instead of Jesus's – even by people who would otherwise add 's in, for example, James's or Chris's. Jesus' is referred to as “an accepted liturgical archaism” in Hart's Rules. Similar examples of notable names ending in an s that are often given a possessive apostrophe with no additional s include Dickens and Williams. There is often a policy of leaving off the additional s on any such name, but this can prove problematic when specific names are contradictory (for example, St James' Park in Newcastle [the football ground] and the area of St. James's Park in London). For more details on practice with geographic names, see the relevant section below. Some writers like to reflect standard spoken practice in cases like these with sake: for convenience' sake, for goodness' sake, for appearance' sake, for compromise' sake, etc. This punctuation is preferred in major style guides. Others prefer to add 's: for convenience's sake.[22] Still others prefer to omit the apostrophe when there is an s sound before sake: for morality's sake, but for convenience sake.[23] So, the problem seems to be whether it's okay for the "-s's" to sound like "zuz". If we want it to sound like "suz", then it would be acceptable to write it as "s'". Personally, I think "-s's" looks better when we're not dealing with plurals, and I think it's more important to clarify whether we are dealing with a swarm of people named Roxa, than to clarify exactly how that last "s" is pronounced. I would say we should adopt "-s's" as our style, and make sure to clarify other "Not wrong but not how we do it" things in the MoS. Side note: We all have holiday Mobiles!