I've found my calling

[Wolverine]

My mission is simple. I must join this organization (http://www.apostrophe.fsnet.co.uk/) and travel the globe with red corrective marker in hand.

Love it. :D

Nice one Dan. I'll draw it to the attention of Stratus ferric on N-W... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Candy]

Re: Halloween or Hallowe'en
I saw this on the message board. 8-[

I thought you could use it's to show possession. :o

[mickal555]

I cant belive they got a messige bord

Edited: I can't belive they got a messige bord :oops: :oops:

[kucharek]

In German, we don't use the apostroph for possession, but it is more and more creeping in from English. Some people even use it for the plural. We call it "Deppenapostroph", where "Depp" is German for dork, fool, moron...

Harald

Re: Halloween or Hallowe'en
I saw this on the message board. 8-[

I thought you could use it's to show possession. :o

Tut tut Candy... :-# :-# :-# :-# :-# :-# :-# :lol: :oops:

[Candy]

We call it "Deppenapostroph", where "Depp" is German for dork, fool, moron...

Harald Johnny Depp will not be happy. #-o

[Maksutov]

Re: Halloween or Hallowe'en
I saw this on the message board. 8-[

I thought you could use it's to show possession. :o

"It's" is the contraction of "it is"; it has never been the possessive of "it", which has always been "its".

Reading any kind of copy where "it's" shows up as a malformed possessive just creates an impression in the mind of the grammatically-educated reader that the writer isn't very adept at English. It's pretty obvious in its misuse.

That's about it.

[Candy]

Re: Halloween or Hallowe'en
I saw this on the message board. 8-[

I thought you could use it's to show possession. :o

"It's" is the contraction of "it is"; it has never been the possessive of "it", which has always been "its".

Reading any kind of copy where "it's" shows up as a malformed possessive just creates an impression in the mind of the grammatically-educated reader that the writer isn't very adept at English. It's pretty obvious in its misuse.

That's about it. What's 'it mean? :lol:

[kucharek]

We call it "Deppenapostroph", where "Depp" is German for dork, fool, moron...

Harald Johnny Depp will not be happy. #-o

I knew this would come. I just did knew by whom. :lol:

[Maksutov]

We call it "Deppenapostroph", where "Depp" is German for dork, fool, moron...

Harald Johnny Depp will not be happy. #-o

I knew this would come. I just did knew by whom. :lol:

You should have used "Narr"! http://www.click-smilies.de/sammlung0304/grinser/grinning-smiley-028.gif

[Maksutov]

Re: Halloween or Hallowe'en
I saw this on the message board. 8-[

I thought you could use it's to show possession. :o

"It's" is the contraction of "it is"; it has never been the possessive of "it", which has always been "its".

Reading any kind of copy where "it's" shows up as a malformed possessive just creates an impression in the mind of the grammatically-educated reader that the writer isn't very adept at English. It's pretty obvious in its misuse.

That's about it. What's 'it mean? :lol:

"What's it all about, Alfie?" - Dionne Warwick

I d'on't pret'end to know all the'''' rules of ap'stroph'e usage - but, they do seem to crop-up largely at 'random these days' dont' they?? :lol: :lol:

[mickal555]

I call them 'mono inverted commera'

[Wolverine]

I d'on't pret'end to know all the'''' rules of ap'stroph'e usage - but, they do seem to crop-up largely at 'random these days' dont' they?? :lol: :lol:

:o

*gets out red corrective pen*

Sorry Dan. One just couldn't resist it!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :oops:

[Wolverine]

You are forgiven, Pete... for now. :lol:

Thank you Your Honour!! :lol:

[Togusa]

My mission is simple. I must join this organization (http://www.apostrophe.fsnet.co.uk/) and travel the globe with red corrective marker in hand.

Love it. :D
Thanks for the link, Wolverine. I've forwarded both your link and a link to this thread to my work e-mail account to try and spread the word amongst my co-workers, a sizeable number of whom think that it's perfectly OK to use apostrophes for plurals (much to my constant irritation). :x

[Wolverine]

Excellent! Good luck, Togusa.

Hmm... should I register badapostrophe.com and proclaim myself The Bad Apostropher?

\:D/ :lol: 8-[

[Jpax2003]

There is some debate over the correct use of apostrophes when applied to acronyms or numbers. Most people had thought that the apostrophe is only used for possession when applied to an acronym, such as NASA's. However, the increasing use of abreviation/acronym combinations with both upper and lower case letters leads some to use the apostrophe for plurals. Then some people believe that is is appropriate to use apostrophe-s for plurals when applied to numbers, such as decades and centuries. Some write a decade like 90's, but perhaps it is better to use the apostrophe as a contraction and write '90s.

[Candy]

Excellent! Good luck, Togusa.

Hmm... should I register badapostrophe.com and proclaim myself The Bad Apostropher?

\:D/ :lol: 8-[ Yeah, I can be your groupie, too! :wink:

[Wolverine]

However, the increasing use of abreviation/acronym combinations with both upper and lower case letters leads some to use the apostrophe for plurals.

From the purist's perspective, they're wrong. :P

I just got some new CDs. -- versus -- This CD's case is cracked.
I just got some new compact discs. -- This compact disc's case is cracked.


Then some people believe that is is appropriate to use apostrophe-s for plurals when applied to numbers, such as decades and centuries.
... and they're wrong too. :P

The 1900s yielded many useful technological advances.
The ninteen hundreds yielded many useful technological advances.

---not---

The nineteen hundred's yielded...

Some write a decade like 90's, but perhaps it is better to use the apostrophe as a contraction and write '90s.

Yes! Correct usage of an apostrophe with decades would denote omission, similar to a contraction (do not = don't). As per your example, 1990s (meaning the full decade) would be shortened to '90s, as would exist in a singular example such as '98 denoting 1998.

[NoXion]

http://www.apostrophe.fsnet.co.uk/images/example20.jpg

I would think that in this case, 'dress's' would be acceptable because it is a contraction of 'dresses'. 'Veil's' however is unacceptable apostrophe abuse.

Does anyone also know whether it's supposed to be 'hapenny' or 'ha'penny'? I think it's the latter but I'm not sure.

[01101001]

Thanks for the link, Wolverine. I've forwarded both your link and a link to this thread to my work e-mail account to try and spread the word amongst my co-workers, a sizeable number of whom think that it's perfectly OK to use apostrophes for plurals.

Does anyone know if apostrophes for plurals (example: aposthophe's for plural's) is a relatively new phenomenon in original writing? I see it a lot these days, and I didn't see it very much, oh, more than a decade ago. The trouble is, my reading habits have changed considerably. I used to read edited books, scholarly papers, magazines and newspapers but now I read, on the Internet, many more amateur writers whose text hasn't been cleansed by an editor. Probably, too, I'm reading a lot more from authors whose native language is not English -- and I have little gripe with them, for my own writing in non-English languages is far from error-free.

Are the any, say, teachers out there that can compare amateur writing over the last few decades? Has it gotten worse?

The rules in these authors' heads confound me. It seems like they don't use apostrophes for all plurals, but just for words whose singular forms end in certain letter combinations. Words that end in a vowel seem to particularly attract apostrophes, and the result is plurals like photo's and eye's. I see it some on words that end in r or l, but I can't generalize. Sometimes I'll see a sentence like "Dogs like to chase cat's." and I'm left wondering what possible internal logic could produce something like that.

[darkhunter]

http://www.apostrophe.fsnet.co.uk/images/example20.jpg

I would think that in this case, 'dress's' would be acceptable because it is a contraction of 'dresses'. 'Veil's' however is unacceptable apostrophe abuse.

Does anyone also know whether it's supposed to be 'hapenny' or 'ha'penny'? I think it's the latter but I'm not sure.

ha'penny (for half penny)

[George]

Huh? What are ya'll's purpose in all this?

[Wolverine]

Does anyone also know whether it's supposed to be 'hapenny' or 'ha'penny'? I think it's the latter but I'm not sure.

ha'penny would be most correct, since it's an altered form of halfpenny.

But you should have used regular quotation marks instead! The others are for quotes within quotes. :P

-5 points! :D

[Wolverine]

Huh? What are ya'll's purpose in all this?

-25 points for giving me a headache! :P

[Candy]

Huh? What are ya'll's purpose in all this?

-25 points for giving me a headache! :P Why am I turned on for some reason? 8-[

[Wolverine]

Sometimes I'll see a sentence like "Dogs like to chase cat's." and I'm left wondering what possible internal logic could produce something like that.

Valid points across the board in your post. I'd also be most curious to understand more about the decline of proper usage, but have no data or experience from which to draw anything other than a WAG.