Chupacabra wrote:An English teacher was explaining to me a few years ago that based of the MLA book (or some sort of general guideline book) that the rule has been changed/simplified(?) and is now just apostrophe "s" added to anything when you want to show possession.
So:
For cat (singular):
Cat's house.
For cats (plural):
Cats's house.
That second bit is an abomination. How hard is it to remember that for plural possesive you just put an apostophe at the end - hell, it saves typing and confusion in my opinion..
Edit: LOL - gramatical error in a post about grammar...
Last edited by Shmee on Tue May 10, 2005 12:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Dr_Watson wrote:maybe we attended the same language nazi rally. :icon26:
I had to become a language Nazi when I started writing textbook material. Those common mistakes drive me nuts.
Also - people who say "I could care less" and "irregardless."
Ugh.
Irregardless bugs me because it's a double-negative. "I could care less" does not bug me because it makes sense. It doesn't quite have the power of "I couldn't care less," but it is at least gramatically correct.
zeeko wrote:ok i'm working on these graduation cards... and i forget the apostrophe rules... if i wanted to say "Celebration at the hazlewood's." (i'm trying to say celebration at the hazlewood's house
would i say hazlewoods' or hazlewood's
If you use the word "the" in front of the name, you're implying all the family members, like saying "all the Hazelwoods," so you would use the plural form of the possessive.
The plural form could either be Hazelwoods' or Hazelwoods's, however you want to say it. Either way is correct, but I would say the first one seems more elegant for things like official invitations and such.
zeeko wrote:ok i'm working on these graduation cards... and i forget the apostrophe rules... if i wanted to say "Celebration at the hazlewood's." (i'm trying to say celebration at the hazlewood's house
would i say hazlewoods' or hazlewood's
I'd say he wouldn't have even used "hazlewood's" in his post if the name was actually spelled "hazlewoods" with an 's' on the end already.
Dr_Watson wrote:maybe we attended the same language nazi rally. :icon26:
I had to become a language Nazi when I started writing textbook material. Those common mistakes drive me nuts.
Also - people who say "I could care less" and "irregardless."
Ugh.
Irregardless bugs me because it's a double-negative. "I could care less" does not bug me because it makes sense. It doesn't quite have the power of "I couldn't care less," but it is at least gramatically correct.
How does "I could care less" make sense? What you are saying is that it is possible to care less, meaning that you do, in fact, care.
tnf wrote:
I had to become a language Nazi when I started writing textbook material. Those common mistakes drive me nuts.
Also - people who say "I could care less" and "irregardless."
Ugh.
Irregardless bugs me because it's a double-negative. "I could care less" does not bug me because it makes sense. It doesn't quite have the power of "I couldn't care less," but it is at least gramatically correct.
How does "I could care less" make sense? What you are saying is that it is possible to care less, meaning that you do, in fact, care.
But by admitting that there is the possibility of caring less, this is actually one step away from full caring.
When a guy is deep into his football game, it would be very strange for his to say something to the effect of, "I could care less about this football game." No, he fully cares about his football game.
If a guy is with his girlfriend watching ballet, he could say somthing to the effect of "I could care less," and this would make sense. For it means that he does have some interest in it, but the reasons for caring are ulterior, such as his desire to be charitable and not piss off his girlfriend. So he'll force himself to care. He might even force himself to care in order to relieve bordom.