Is Keir Starmer Really Going To Arrest...
News0 min ago
Apostrophe + "s" after the letter "s"
24 Answers
Is it correct to use an apostrophe plus "s" after a name that ends in "s"?
For example, which is correct :
Charles' hair is blonde OR Charles's hair is blonde?
T.I.A.
For example, which is correct :
Charles' hair is blonde OR Charles's hair is blonde?
T.I.A.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by SurreyGuy. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Either is actually correct although in most cases you will see Charles' hair rather than Charles's
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A790175
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A790175
Actually I think all the answers were pretty much the same.
There is of course not really any such thing as correct or incorrect in spelling or punctuation.
There is rather common or accepted usage and that changes all the time.
The acceptability of Charles's may well be one such change.
I confidently predict the eventual demise of the semi-colon. You'll see that it's already vanished from nearly all technical publications and is becoming increasingly rare in things like newspapers.
However I think the apostraphe is here to stay as a carefully placed one can totally alter a sentence.
A large woman's handbag is somewhat different from a large womans handbag.
Although we manage to work it out in speech - which is just as well because if we didn't the above mistake could earn you quite a slap!.
There is of course not really any such thing as correct or incorrect in spelling or punctuation.
There is rather common or accepted usage and that changes all the time.
The acceptability of Charles's may well be one such change.
I confidently predict the eventual demise of the semi-colon. You'll see that it's already vanished from nearly all technical publications and is becoming increasingly rare in things like newspapers.
However I think the apostraphe is here to stay as a carefully placed one can totally alter a sentence.
A large woman's handbag is somewhat different from a large womans handbag.
Although we manage to work it out in speech - which is just as well because if we didn't the above mistake could earn you quite a slap!.
Actually, Solarjunkie may well be right in American English but is not in British English. Here's what The Oxford English Dictionary - the 'bible' of British English usage - has to say re blond/blonde...
"Still sometimes treated as French as to be written without final e when applied to a man, especially substantively...but in Britain the form blonde is now preferred in all senses."
Note the use of 'sometimes' and 'all' above. Thus, you will virtually never nowadays see 'He has blond hair' or 'He is a blond' in a British setting.
British English uses grey and American English gray when referring to the colour.
"Still sometimes treated as French as to be written without final e when applied to a man, especially substantively...but in Britain the form blonde is now preferred in all senses."
Note the use of 'sometimes' and 'all' above. Thus, you will virtually never nowadays see 'He has blond hair' or 'He is a blond' in a British setting.
British English uses grey and American English gray when referring to the colour.
I was thinking of a question I was posed at school - which is correct, the yolk of an egg ARE white or the yolk of an egg IS white?
I fell for it at the time and have since looked out for the same!
Yes, pedant is a fair term, though I usually bow to the OED. We all cringe at certain things and I have always understood that when a word is directly lifted from another language, the original spelling prevails. So I will write of a blonde fiancee and a blond fiance till my dying day! Our beloved English is of course a living language so personally I think "blond" will become the usual spelling in future.
I fell for it at the time and have since looked out for the same!
Yes, pedant is a fair term, though I usually bow to the OED. We all cringe at certain things and I have always understood that when a word is directly lifted from another language, the original spelling prevails. So I will write of a blonde fiancee and a blond fiance till my dying day! Our beloved English is of course a living language so personally I think "blond" will become the usual spelling in future.
Sorry Jake the Peg but
"a large woman's handbag"
will have an apostrophe irrespective of whether it's the woman or the bag that is large , since the apostrophe is simply showing the bag belongs to the woman.
Anyway, if the bag is large I'd say "a woman's large bag"
I've always been pendantic about apostrophes but I think they will disappear; most people misuse them and our spoken communications are understood without us having to flag up an apostrophe. I still put apostrophes and semi-colons in my texts though.
"a large woman's handbag"
will have an apostrophe irrespective of whether it's the woman or the bag that is large , since the apostrophe is simply showing the bag belongs to the woman.
Anyway, if the bag is large I'd say "a woman's large bag"
I've always been pendantic about apostrophes but I think they will disappear; most people misuse them and our spoken communications are understood without us having to flag up an apostrophe. I still put apostrophes and semi-colons in my texts though.
I remember when there used be hyphens in "to-day" and "to-morrow".
Has the loss of the hyphen in these words been an improvement or another example of deteriorating standards? I think the former in this case, but the changes to language and punctuation is an interesting topic (at least I think so, although I can sense many AB readers yawning and going over to Chatterbank at this point).
Has the loss of the hyphen in these words been an improvement or another example of deteriorating standards? I think the former in this case, but the changes to language and punctuation is an interesting topic (at least I think so, although I can sense many AB readers yawning and going over to Chatterbank at this point).
Solarjunkie, you are of course perfectly free to use English however you see fit, but we should all be clear that there is no reason to imagine distinguishing blonde/blond on gender grounds is upholding historic usage. The two earliest recorded uses of the word - both from the 1480s and both clearly referring to men - are...
a) "The rays of the sun make the hair of a man auburn or blonde."
b) "They array their hair like women and force it to be yellow and if they be black they make them blonde and auburn."
The original spelling in each case is blounde.)
Blond without an e appeared nowhere in English until another three centuries had passed and, even thereafter, it was not gender-specific. In The Mill on the Floss, George Eliot wrote, "If the blond girl were forsaken...", for example.
This is obviously a case where "Vive la diff�rence!" is an irrelevance here in Britain, but good luck to you in trying to maintain it! Cheers
a) "The rays of the sun make the hair of a man auburn or blonde."
b) "They array their hair like women and force it to be yellow and if they be black they make them blonde and auburn."
The original spelling in each case is blounde.)
Blond without an e appeared nowhere in English until another three centuries had passed and, even thereafter, it was not gender-specific. In The Mill on the Floss, George Eliot wrote, "If the blond girl were forsaken...", for example.
This is obviously a case where "Vive la diff�rence!" is an irrelevance here in Britain, but good luck to you in trying to maintain it! Cheers
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.