Apostrophes, by request

In English, there are three common uses for the apostrophe [ ‘ ]:

  • to show omission (contraction)
  • to show possession
  • to clarify the meaning or pronunciation of certain non-standard words (typically plurals of abbreviations)

Most folks are familiar with the first two of these uses, or with all three. But most of us also get them wrong now and then. Lynn Truss dedicates at least a full chapter of Eats, Shoots & Leaves just to the apostrophe and common errors involving it.

Omission: When an apostrophe is used to note omission, it’s most commonly when letters are dropped in the formation of a contraction – when do not becomes don’t, for example, or when it is becomes it’s. There are less common contractions – fo’c’sle, o’clock, etc. – but these follow essentially the same rule (forecastle, of the clock). There are also contractions where the apostrophe shows characters dropped at the front of the word – ’tis, ’twas, ’12, etc. (for it is, it was, 2012).

Possession: The use of apostrophes to show possession seems to trip people up frequently. The various rules can get complicated (even the often terse AP Stylebook devotes four full columns to it), but I’ll try to keep it simple, without delving into every special case and exception. There are really two simple general rules that cover the majority of uses, and three special cases that deserve brief mention.

– When a noun is singular and possessive (Mike’s helmet – one Mike, one helmet), add [‘s].

– When a noun is plural and possessive (The teams’ helmets – more than one team, lots of helmets), simply add [ ‘ ]. If the plural noun doesn’t end in s (The children’s helmets), it’s [‘s] again.

The first special case worth knowing about: if the singular noun already ends in s (The boss’ office – one boss, one office) then the general idea is to only add [ ‘ ], not [‘s]. However, this varies in practice, and can often be subject to an individual publisher’s style. Chicago style, for example, recommends always using [‘s] (The boss’s office). If you’re not operating under a specific style, at least do your best to be consistent.

A second special case worth mentioning is similar. In the past some sources have recommended that nouns, especially proper nouns (names) ending in s, z, or x (when they sound near s), such as Marcus, Borax, or Hafez, not take [‘s] but only [ ‘ ]: Marcus’ script, Borax’ claims, Hafez’ problem. Current style seems to be moving away from this, with Chicago explicitly recommending [‘s]: Marcus’s script, Borax’s claims, Hafez’s problem (Chicago 16, 7.16).

A final special case worth mentioning could seem like a subset of the others. It’s what in older editions of style guides is sometimes called ‘the biblical exception.’ This exception notes that when biblical and classical proper nouns form a possessive (Jesus’, Moses’, Sophocles‘, Socrates’) the final [s] should be dropped. I specified older editions here, because current style is moving away from this: “In a departure from earlier practice, Chicago no longer recommends the traditional exception for proper classical names” (Chicago 16, 7.18, 354). Check the specific style you’re using, but chances are that if you’re making the biblical exception, then you’re out of date.

Clarification of unusual plurals or pronunciations :  When using a plural form that could be unclear – often of an abbreviation – add [‘s] when forming the plural: CPA’s, MBA’s, IOU’s, ERA’s, and so on. You’ll also rarely encounter a word form that will cause confusion if not helped by an apostrophe. For example, this word: koed. You might be tempted to pronounce it as “code” or “co-ed.” However, if I insert an apostrophe and make it ko’ed you’re much more likely to recognize that it’s pronounced “kay-ode,” as the past tense of ko, short for knocked out. A last form to note here would be dates. While you would shorten 1999 to ’99, most styles will have you refer to the entire decade as either the 1990s (no [ ‘ ], since it’s not possessive) or, in short form, as the ’90s (with only the omission apostrophe). Be careful of unusual cases, like “1990’s greatest hits” (the hits of 1990) or “the 1990s’ greatest hits” (the hits of an entire decade) – which would not only be very unusual in structure, but would also use the apostrophe in what might look like unusual ways.


About thebettereditor

Chris holds a BA degree in history from the University of Virginia and a Master of Fine Arts (MFA) Degree in writing from the University of Southern Maine (Stonecoast). He has worked extensively with professional and semi-professional writers and enthusiastic amateurs for about 20 years. He has several years experience in scientific publishing, but has also worked in information technology, insurance, health care, and education (he taught writing at the university level for a number of years). Since 2011, he's also specialized in helping small business meet their writing and editing needs on a budget.
This entry was posted in Punctuation, Requested and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Apostrophes, by request

  1. Pingback: In Praise of Minor Holidays / -day’s / -days’ | thebettereditor

  2. Lorna D. enesio says:

    I was researching the correct word to use between ineffectual and ineffective when I came across your blog. It led me to other posts that I find interesting and helpful. English is not my mother tongue but I try to follow the correct grammar and usage especially in written language.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.