Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucsfcgl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!qantel!dual!ucbvax!ucsfcgl!arnold
From: arnold@ucsfcgl.UUCP (Ken Arnold%CGL)
Newsgroups: net.nlang
Subject: Re: Possessive plurals of last names
Message-ID: <642@ucsfcgl.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 18-Sep-85 22:38:29 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucsfcgl.642
Posted: Wed Sep 18 22:38:29 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 20-Sep-85 06:58:01 EDT
References: <2475@mit-hermes.ARPA>
Reply-To: arnold@ucsfcgl.UUCP (Ken Arnold)
Distribution: net
Organization: UCSF Computer Graphics Lab
Lines: 16

> Our local newspaper uses anomalous punctuation of plural possessives 
> attached to people's last names...
> 
> Thus: "The students' possessions were destroyed in a fire."
> But: "The Johnson's possessions...."
> 
> What do others think?

I always use a phonetic rule.  For example "Thomas's", since it is
pronounced "thomases", but "students'", not "students's", since one
does not say "studentses", but "students".  I have no "official"
references around, but it is my understanding that this is "officially"
condoned, and besides, I couldn't care less.  Language usage evolves,
so there's no harm it giving it a bit of a shove towards some
reasonable rule.
		Ken Arnold


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com