Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site sphinx.UChicago.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!mmar
From: mmar@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Mitchell Marks)
Newsgroups: net.nlang
Subject: Re: Possessive plurals of last names
Message-ID: <1136@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 24-Sep-85 01:17:06 EDT
Article-I.D.: sphinx.1136
Posted: Tue Sep 24 01:17:06 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 25-Sep-85 03:31:12 EDT
References: <2475@mit-hermes.ARPA>, <642@ucsfcgl.UUCP>
Organization: U Chicago -- Linguistics Dept
Lines: 35

> > 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
> 
> 

Ken, I think you may have read the original question too quickly -- your
analogy doesn't really match the case.  In fact I agree with you on the
(different) question you raise, but his question didnt really suggest the
alternative you object to.  I take it he was urging
	           the Johnsons' possessions
in place of the odd
		   the Johnson's possessions

So nobody has been urging anything analogous to
                     students's
-- 

            -- Mitch Marks @ UChicago 
               ...ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!mmar
P.S.  My host has been down for over a week, so please forgive some
belated-looking replies to older articles.  Thanks.


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com