ATEG Archives

October 2000

ATEG@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Johanna Rubba <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:51:22 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (21 lines)
One of my students stumped me in class yesterday. We were discussing
apostrophe use, and she asked how one would punctuate the possessive
plural of 'brother-in-law', assuming 'brother' carries the plural marker.

Brothers'-in-law        looks terrible to me, but
brothers-in-law's       looks no better.

I think this example is a good argument for shifting the plural to
'brother-in-laws' (I'm kidding, actually, 'brother-in-laws' sounds wrong
to me).

What do you all think?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Johanna Rubba   Assistant Professor, Linguistics
English Department, California Polytechnic State University
One Grand Avenue  • San Luis Obispo, CA 93407
Tel. (805)-756-2184  •  Fax: (805)-756-6374 • Dept. Phone.  756-259
• E-mail: [log in to unmask] •  Home page: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ATOM RSS1 RSS2