DTMark Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Working on a jewellery website restructuring the categories. Most sites have: Men's Jewellery Ladies' Jewellery Why is the apostrophe before the s in mens, but after in ladies.. is the above grammatically right, or should they both have the apostrophe after the s? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porca misèria Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Men is plural. It's a standard possessive apostrophe. Ladies is plural too, and the apostrophe is likewise possessive. But the following s is conventionally omitted from a word already ending in s. Is this evidence that jewellers are more literate than greengrocer's[sic]? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LC1 Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Men doesn't have an s at the end, hence apostrophe s. Ladies does, hence s apostrophe. Simples Edit: Wot he said ^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Banner Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Because 'men', the plural of 'man', does not end in 's'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GloomMonger Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Mens and Ladies are toilets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scunnered Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 I think the problem is that plurals and possessives both end with s (dogs and dog's), so to avoid ambiguity you put the apostrophe after the s in a plural possessive: "dogs' toys". You run into problems with that if the singular already ends with an s though: "Tom Jones' trousers". Probably the most sensible thing would be to always use 's: "dogs's toys", "Tom Jones's trousers"; but that sounds silly. Back to the original question. "Men" doesn't end with an s, so "men's" is OK. "Ladies", does end with an s though, so the apostrophe goes afterwards. "Ladie's" definitely woulnd't look right. I suppose the problem is that not all plurals end in s: "men", "fish", "sheep", and so on. It's hard to know what to do with these. "Men's" looks OK, but "fish's" looks wrong and "sheep's" is confusing because the singular is the same as the plural and you can't tell if tehre's one sheep involved or less. I think people have just made up random rules to deal with this kind of thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DTMark Posted May 23, 2016 Author Share Posted May 23, 2016 I think the problem is that plurals and possessives both end with s (dogs and dog's), so to avoid ambiguity you put the apostrophe after the s in a plural possessive: "dogs' toys". You run into problems with that if the singular already ends with an s though: "Tom Jones' trousers". Probably the most sensible thing would be to always use 's: "dogs's toys", "Tom Jones's trousers"; but that sounds silly. Back to the original question. "Men" doesn't end with an s, so "men's" is OK. "Ladies", does end with an s though, so the apostrophe goes afterwards. "Ladie's" definitely woulnd't look right. I suppose the problem is that not all plurals end in s: "men", "fish", "sheep", and so on. It's hard to know what to do with these. "Men's" looks OK, but "fish's" looks wrong and "sheep's" is confusing because the singular is the same as the plural and you can't tell if tehre's one sheep involved or less. I think people have just made up random rules to deal with this kind of thing. ^ is exactly my interpretation. While it has never kept me awake at night, I'd always wondered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justthisbloke Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 And while we're on this topic, why is that grocer's get blamed for the grocers' apostrophe? It seems a long way from exclusive to purveyors of apples and cauliflowers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bossybabe Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 The whole possessive apostrophe thing started when English said for "John, his book". This was gradually shortened to "John's book", with the apostrophe indicating the word 'his' was missing. (Analogous to "do not" being shortened to "don't". I guess it was just to difficult to shorten "her"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bossybabe Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 And while we're on this topic, why is that grocer's get blamed for the grocers' apostrophe? It seems a long way from exclusive to purveyors of apples and cauliflowers. Because they always seem to get the apostrophe in the wrong place!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DTMark Posted May 23, 2016 Author Share Posted May 23, 2016 Because they always seem to get the apostrophe in the wrong place!! It's when I see signs like.. Apple's £price/kilo .. that I grimace and feel like some frustrated school-teacher. Mind you if they didn't put the sign on, I'd never have known they were apples.. (end sarcasm mode) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloo Loo Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 The whole possessive apostrophe thing started when English said for "John, his book". This was gradually shortened to "John's book", with the apostrophe indicating the word 'his' was missing. (Analogous to "do not" being shortened to "don't". I guess it was just to difficult to shorten "her"! shurely, it was "John, hif book" should be apostophe f? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happy_renting Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 And while we're on this topic, why is that grocers get blamed for the grocers' apostrophe? It seems a long way from exclusive to purveyors of apples and cauliflowers. FIFY. Unless you were being ironic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happy_renting Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 I think the problem is that plurals and possessives both end with s (dogs and dog's), so to avoid ambiguity you put the apostrophe after the s in a plural possessive: "dogs' toys". You run into problems with that if the singular already ends with an s though: "Tom Jones' trousers". Probably the most sensible thing would be to always use 's: "dogs's toys", "Tom Jones's trousers"; but that sounds silly. E.g. both of the following can be correct, as appropriate: Dog's bоllocks (1 dog, 2 bоllocks) Dogs' bоllocks (n dogs, 2xn bоllocks) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riedquat Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 It's when I see signs like.. Apple's £price/kilo .. that I grimace and feel like some frustrated school-teacher. Mind you if they didn't put the sign on, I'd never have known they were apples.. (end sarcasm mode) Annoys me too. Bloody metric prices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justthisbloke Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 FIFY. Unless you were being ironic. I wa's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justthisbloke Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Annoys me too. Bloody metric prices. You'd rather see apples priced in groats/peck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riedquat Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 You'd rather see apples priced in groats/peck! I prefer bartering for them in fractions of a goat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happy_renting Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 I wa's. Um... so was I then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happy_renting Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 I prefer bartering for them in fractions of a goat. You must be kidding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happy_renting Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 You'd rather see apples priced in groats/peck! IIRC a groat was 1/63rd of a sovereign. Pre-decimal coinage was really clever and practical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecrashingisles Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Working on a jewellery website restructuring the categories. Most sites have: Men's Jewellery Ladies' Jewellery Why is the apostrophe before the s in mens, but after in ladies.. is the above grammatically right, or should they both have the apostrophe after the s? Also mens rea doesn't have an apostrophe but ladies' rea does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riedquat Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 IIRC a groat was 1/63rd of a sovereign. Pre-decimal coinage was really clever and practical. 1/63 of a guinea (one pound one shilling, started off as a pound but fluctuated with the price of gold), a groat being 4 pence. A sovereign's nominal value is a pound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happy_renting Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 1/63 of a guinea (one pound one shilling, started off as a pound but fluctuated with the price of gold), a groat being 4 pence. A sovereign's nominal value is a pound. Oops, I should have spotted that mistake. Yes, I meant guinea. Guineas are still used for pricing in some cattle auctions. Groats are still minted for Maundy Money, but the face value is now 4p not 4d. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frankief Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 You must be of been kidding. Corrected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.