apostrophes

[nigelmercier]

If you had to save the world by defusing a nuclear bomb, and it said " take two turn's to the left and two turn's to the right " I think you would get the drift.

I would assume that the writer was poorly educated, or not English. I would modify my reliance on the instructions accordingly.

... You can use "I" to be polite ...

Whoever told you that was wrong.

Eh?

Quite simply, it is neither "polite" nor correct to use "I" in situations that require "me".

 

[bikerbill]

I would assume that the writer was poorly educated, or not English. I would modify my reliance on the instructions accordingly.



Whoever told you that was wrong.



Quite simply, it is neither "polite" nor correct to use "I" in situations that require "me".

Sorry, but I don't think so! I was taught at school (a long time ago) to use 'I' as it is deemed more polite.

 

[Lakesailor]

Sorry, but I don't think so! I was taught at school (a long time ago) to use 'I' as it is deemed more polite.

"I" instead of "me"?

So I should be saying "I got it off of I mate."?

 

[NormanS]

Sorry, but I don't think so! I was taught at school (a long time ago) to use 'I' as it is deemed more polite.

You should sue. You were misinformed.

 

[alan_d]

This leads to a further unanswered question :-

Does the apostrophe system need overhauling ?

I think the answer has to be yes.

Any ideas how this could be done ?

Why do you think it needs overhauling? The current system is (largely) logical, internally consistent and provides a useful way to distinguish between plurals and possessives in written English. True, many people seem not to understand the system or choose to disregard it, but is that a reason to change it? You could apply the same argument to the COLREGS.

(Do you see what I did there?)

 

[agurney]

I don't know . Possibly.

As a practical forum, we are at least giving this thread some real meaning now.

The question has to be asked :-

Has an abused apostrophe ever caused loss of life or injury ?

Google suggests not.

.. at least the reference wasn't Wikipedia.

From personal experience, self assembly mail order bicycles and wardrobes have been innocent victims of poorly constructed instructions. Both with content and grammatical construction. There is no doubt that this has led to personal injury . Particularly on Christmas mornings.

This leads to a further unanswered question :-

Does the apostrophe system need overhauling ?

I think the answer has to be yes.

Any ideas how this could be done ?

English may be inconsistent in many respects, but the apostrophe rules work fine as they are.
However, if you sprinkle apostrophes around just for decoration then comprehension of the following sentence fragments might be a bit challenging. How many boats? How many toilets? Are they shared? Which way are they going?

.. boat's head ..
.. boats head ..
.. boats' head ..

 

[nigelmercier]

I was taught at school (a long time ago) to use 'I' as it is deemed more polite.

As Norman says, you were misinformed.

 

[bikerbill]

"I" instead of "me"?

So I should be saying "I got it off of I mate."?

FFS. Now you are talking nonsense "I got it off me mate" is bad English

 

[bikerbill]

You should sue. You were misinformed.

Yeah, that's what I'll do.

 

[oldvarnish]

.. at least the reference wasn't Wikipedia.



English may be inconsistent in many respects, but the apostrophe rules work fine as they are.
However, if you sprinkle apostrophes around just for decoration then comprehension of the following sentence fragments might be a bit challenging. How many boats? How many toilets? Are they shared? Which way are they going?

.. boat's head ..
.. boats head ..
.. boats' head ..

Very good example

 

[agurney]

Sorry, but I don't think so! I was taught at school (a long time ago) to use 'I' as it is deemed more polite.

Aye, right.

 

[bikerbill]

Aye, right.

I had to phone a colleague who is an English teacher. She said it is (it's) acceptable to use I or me, though it depends on the narrative. However, she did say that the over use of the comma gets on her goat

 

[whipper_snapper]

I had to phone a colleague who is an English teacher. She said it is (it's) acceptable to use I or me, though it depends on the narrative. However, she did say that the over use of the comma gets on her goat

She is also wrong!

The rules are for you and me is correct English.
The rules are for you and I is not correct English.

That is not debatable.

You may not care, it certainly does not keep me awake at night, but it is not one of those grey areas where there is not an agreed practice.

 

[Rivers & creeks]

Not wishing to hijack the nut's and bolt's thread, are there any circumstances where the pedants amongst us would use inappropriate apostrophes. How about the plural of GPS? GPSs looks wrong although it's correct. GPS's looks right when it is wrong.
Next, 'fewer' or 'less'?

The plural of GPS is GPies

 

[Amulet]

I spend my life writing - not than I'm a writer, and I wouldn't boast that I do it well. This aspect of my job has resulted in me amassing a substantial collection of style guides in the hope that they'll help me write more clearly. I am struck by the fact that none of the style guides - even those as old as "Fowler" - are as dogmatic about what's right and wrong as the people on this forum. (Incidentally Fowler would allow an apostrophe in, say, VHF's, but not insist on it.)

Style guides are what they say they are. The word "style" does not imply that there is only one style, and a "guide" guides, it does not lay down rules.

E.g., a scientific editor corrected something I published in 1972 to use the form "E.g.," on the basis that it was an abbreviation, so it needs the dots, and if you wrote "For example" you'd put a comma after it. This is not nowadays the normal form. Eg the Guardian Style Guide likes no punctuation.

Modern usage in all the guides I have would never pluralise "forum" as "fora" - they all say "forums" is the preferred plural. Many forumites (is that a word ?) use the plural "fora". As far as I can see, unless you are writing for the Guardian it's allowed. No one writes "the grafitti are..." but it's a plural noun. I have seen forum posts about "the Cuillins"; what's the "s" doing on the end of a plural noun? Lighten up - it's language, it's dynamic, it's exciting - I'm well bored of this pedantry.

And as for that book - "Eat's Shoots and Leaves" - Eeks, Shouts and Raves more like. It is rant and twaddle from an uneducated mind.

 

[whipper_snapper]

I spend my life writing - not than I'm a writer, and I wouldn't boast that I do it well. This aspect of my job has resulted in me amassing a substantial collection of style guides in the hope that they'll help me write more clearly. I am struck by the fact that none of the style guides - even those as old as "Fowler" - are as dogmatic about what's right and wrong as the people on this forum. (Incidentally Fowler would allow an apostrophe in, say, VHF's, but not insist on it.) .

Sure, but I doubt Fowler would approve of 'the rules are for I'.

One that I come across a lot and like to break the rules on is 'data' as a plural. Whenever I write 'This data suggests that......', someone jumps up and down and changes it to 'These data suggest that.....'. I know that data is a plural, but no-one uses it in speech so why get excited about it when written?

 

[Amulet]

Sure, but I doubt Fowler would approve of 'the rules are for I'.

One that I come across a lot and like to break the rules on is 'data' as a plural. Whenever I write 'This data suggest that......', someone jumps up and down and changes it to 'These data suggest that.....'. I know that data is a plural, but noone uses it in speech so why get excited about it when written?

Yep, I agree about the case issue. There is a curious idiom which uses "I" in the object or indirect object only when it's "X and me". I don't use it, but I don't get bent out of shape when someone else does. My job has been in data provision for 35 years, and "data" to me is a naturally plural noun, and is so probably to most professionals in Europe. It sure isn't in Oz, where I work right now, and that doesn't bother me. From your example above "This data suggest that...", I'd correct it to "These data suggest that... " but I wouldn't get heated if someone corrected it to "This data suggests that..", but I would want one or the other correction.

 

[whipper_snapper]

Yep, I agree about the case issue. There is a curious idiom which uses "I" in the object or indirect object only when it's "X and me". I don't use it, but I don't get bent out of shape when someone else does. My job has been in data provision for 35 years, and "data" to me is a naturally plural noun, and is so probably to most professionals in Europe. It sure isn't in Oz, where I work right now, and that doesn't bother me. From your example above "This data suggest that...", I'd correct it to "These data suggest that... " but I wouldn't get heated if someone corrected it to "This data suggests that..", but I would want one or the other correction.

Ha! Oops! Quite right! I would not of course write 'This data suggest that'!! It's easy to make a fool of yourself in these exchanges isn't it!


(I have changed my original post so now your response won't make sense!!)

 

[whipper_snapper]

Yep, I agree about the case issue. There is a curious idiom which uses "I" in the object or indirect object only when it's "X and me". I don't use it, but I don't get bent out of shape when someone else does.

Yes, I think it starts with people who don't understand it, trying to be excessively 'polite'. It is like who and whom, I have seen people asserting that whom is just a polite form of who! To me it sounds slimy and obsequious to use whom when who is correct.

 

[chewi]

"I" instead of "me"?

So I should be saying "I got it off of I mate."?

That should be "I got it from my mate", so you're confusing the issue.

Otherwise its I or me as you say, and I have never heard of this "polite" substitution.