I was also taught to form
a possessive by putting the apostrophe after an s sound, but here’s what
the 1957 Strunk and White has to say:
“Form the
possessive singular of nouns by adding ‘s. Follow this rule whatever the
final consonant. Thus write, ‘Charles’s friend’ …”
and so forth. S&W do make an exception for ancient proper names (for
example, Jesus’ sake, or for conscience’ or for righteousness’
sake). They do an end run around Moses and Isis, recommending that the
writer replace them with “the laws of Moses” or “the
I was taught in the
60s, which meant that my teachers may have learned from an even more antique
source that S&W 1957.
Kathleen
From:
Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2006 8:51
AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Possessive form
Thanks for checking sources on the rule
Paul cited. I was taught as he was, to use only the apostrophe after a
singular noun ending in an /s/ (note, not an <s>, that is, the sound, not
the letter). I have seen the –‘s in that environment
more frequently, so I’m wondering when the change took place in the
handbooks. It would be interesting to look at earlier editions to see if
the advice changes.
Herb
From:
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 11:11
PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Possessive form
Thanks for sharing that article, Paul.
I found one point odd, though: the authors
suggest that grammarians widely favor putting only the apostrophe (and not an
additional “s”) after singular nouns that end in “s.”
Although I run into people in my business writing seminars frequently who have
been taught that rule, it is not espoused by Chicago,
MLA, or APA. In fact, until tonight, I had been
unable to find it in print anywhere. Those three very reputable style guides
(and a host of others) prescribe putting the apostrophe and an additional “s” after
all singular nouns, whether they end in “s” or not.
We can have fun debating the merits of
such rules, but what do you tell your students to do when they ask? I usually
resort to explaining the whole notion of style guides and differences among
disciplines, but first- and second-year students glaze over.
Nancy L. Tuten, PhD
Professor of English
Director of the
Writing-across-the-Curriculum Program
803-786-3706
From:
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2006 9:52
PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Possessive form
Of course, life is probably more complicated than Wikipedia
will allow. I believe that the history of the apostrophe as apossessive marker
is also more complex. You might want to check out the following paper:
I sheds some light, or rather thins out some fo the
shadow, on this history.
More to the point, I think, is the question of what's
happening to the apostrophe now. It seems to me that it's dying a slow,
agonizing death! I for one will miss it (of course. Bernard Shaw ignored it,
and no one seems to think the less of him because of that!).
Paul D.
----- Original Message ----
From: Max Morenberg <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Monday, June 5, 2006 9:16:26 PM
Subject: Re: Possessive form
Peter,
I haven't read into the history of punctuation in a
long time. But I think the "his" story has little or no reality. Here
is the wikipedia.com explanation:
Despite the above, the English possessive did originate in a genitive case. In Old English, a common singular genitive ending was -es. The apostrophe in the modern possessive marker is in fact an indicator of the e that is "missing" from the Old English morphology. . . .