I've just been reading Lynne Truss's book and came across this

quote:

---

Someone wrote to say that my use of "one's" was wrong, and that it should be ones. This is such rubbish that I refuse to argue about it.

---

At fist glance I agreed with her but then I started thinking.
Surely ones is analogous to my, your, his her and [significantly) its.
If that's the case then wouldn't ones be the correct form. If not, why not ?

Every silver lining has a cloud.
Read all about my travels around the world here.
Read even more of my travel writing and poems on my weblog.

quote:

---

Originally posted by BobHale:
At fist glance...

---

In either case it's not worth fighting over, is it?

I opt for "ones." I've also recently decided I prefer "1980s" over "1980's" BUT will hang on to "the 80's" over "the 80s."

The general rule: when in doubt, go with what looks better.

quote:

---

Originally posted by C J Strolin:

quote:

---

Originally posted by BobHale:
At fist glance...

---

In either case it's not worth fighting over, is it?

I opt for "ones." I've also recently decided I prefer "1980s" over "1980's" BUT will hang on to "the 80's" over "the 80s."

The general rule: when in doubt, go with what looks better.

---

or even the '80s which is of course correct !

And we'll be leaving the chat any minute now. Just me RE and arnie showed up tonight.

Every silver lining has a cloud.
Read all about my travels around the world here.
Read even more of my travel writing and poems on my weblog.

According to Michal Temple, the promouns yours, hers ours theirs and its have no apostrophe but one's does.

And no. I don't know what the reason is but I stick to the rule.

Richard English

Interesting question. I wasn't aware of the particular rule that Richard cites, but I would always write, for example, "a room of one's own." Yet, I would never put an apostrophe in "yours", "hers", etc.

Speaking of apostrophes, I thought people in the UK used the "Charles's," while those of us in the US often didn't. I am reading a Brendan O'Carroll (Irish) book where he consistently writes "Agnes' book."

1. Ireland is not part of the UK, although they generally follow the same spelling, etc. conventions as us.
2. I don't think the use of such forms as Agnes' (rather than Agnes's) is solely a US/UK divide. The only books that I have heard of that approve of the former construction are American, but I have seen both forms used by persons from each side of the Atlantic.
3. Was the book was published in the US? Does it use American spellings? It may have been edited by an American.

OK, I'll reverse myself here. "A room of one's own," with the apostrophe, does look better than its apostrophe-less counterpart. I let B.H.'s logic cloud my thinking on this one.

I'll stick with "the 80's" when refering to the decade since the apostrophe in "the '80s" refers to the dropped "19" (from "1980") which should be apparent from the text. To add another apostrophe before the S (as in "the '80's") gives it the look of a quotation within a quotation. Just too many little flecks casually tossed about the page giving our beloved Mother Tongue a slight French resemblance

However, "Temperatures reached the 80s today," as a simple pluralization, seems perfectly fine to me, especially considering how cold it's been lately.


As resident apostrophe expert, I realize that R.E. may not totally approve but since he is apparently not free bound to all doers going gang for him, possibly his views on these matters may be respectfully questioned.

Which matters?

Richard English

You da bomb, R.E.!

quote:

---

As resident apostrophe expert, I realize that R.E. may not totally approve but since he is apparently not free bound to all doers going gang for him, possibly his views on these matters may be respectfully questioned.

---

As resident nit picker, I .... wonder if that sentence merits a rewrite.

Is the resident apostrophe expert dangling ? Deliberately ambiguous?

Is there a real danger that all doers might go gang for him?

What a heap of subjunctive mood !!

(I agree with your treatment of the 80s and suggest it could be spelled out, as in the eighties, thus avoiding the apostrophe question.)

The Chicago Manual of Style stipulates prefixed apostrophes for elided decades. Makes the most sense to me.

Before this forum, I used apostrophes wrong. There is an early post of mine where I used one in a plural word! Arnie, in his gentle and professorial ways, taught me the rules. So, I cannot, and will not, become arrogant about apostrophes.

However, since arnie's lesson, I have watched uses of apostrophes with interest and have read several style books. It is quite clear to me that the preference, even in the states, is to use apostrophes sparingly. The preference also seems to be not to use them with numbers, unless, of course, you are using the number as possessive, e.g. "the 60's clothing" (or is "60s" an adjective there?). Also, in my apostrophe observations, I have found that oftentimes we in the U.S. don't use the "s's." Just my observations--and definitely not authoritarian in nature!

Now, to answer your question, arnie, about O'Carroll's book: It was published by the Penguin Group, and the book lists several publishing countries/cities, including the New York, London, Australia, Canada, India, South Africa. However, it specifically was printed in the US. If I recall correctly, the words have been Americanized (eg "honor," not "honour.") The title of my book is very interesting: "The Young Wan." Do you, in England, use that word "wan?" We don't in the US.

In answer to your questions, J.T., all of the above. I too would opt for "the eighties" were in not for my shameful lazy streak perpetually getting in the way. With the time I save not hitting those four extra strokes on the keyboard I could bring up 1.7 more offerings from the surrealist compliment generator.

And jheem, as soon as I complete my rewrite of the OED, maybe I'll take on this Chicago Manual of Style you speak of. (Actually, seeing as how this is Sufitz and Kalleh's neighborhood, I probably should farm out that little chore to them.)


And, as an editted P.S., note the identical time with Kalleh's post above. This, along with Shufitz' comment (I'm sorry but I just can't bring myself to type "Shufitz's" - it just looks too weird) at 10:07 today on the more-vowels-musical-instrument thread suggest that we're presently conducting our chat a day late. When last I checked, we had SIX members on line at once. Not the most efficient way to chat but there you have it...

[This message was edited by C J Strolin on Mon Feb 16th, 2004 at 10:52.]

quote:

---

Do you, in England, use that word "wan?" We don't in the US.

---

"Wan" is, I think, an approximation of the Dublin pronunciation of "one".

Which brings us back, rather neatly, to the original topic.

quote:

---

And jheem, as soon as I complete my rewrite of the OED, maybe I'll take on this Chicago Manual of Style you speak of. (Actually, seeing as how this is Sufitz and Kalleh's neighborhood, I probably should farm out that little chore to them.)

---

A goodly pursuit this rewriting of the extant. (Cf. Borges short story about Pierre Menard the writer of Don Quijote.) Academe has been doing this for millennia.

Apostrophe, like all the words for punctuation in English, is an interesting word, originally a rhetorical term, meaning to 'turn away from all others to one and address him specially' (L&S) or 'the addressing of a usually absent person' (A-H).

"Apostrophe also, which consists in the diversion of our address from the judge, is wonderfully stirring, whether we attack our adversary as in the passage, 'What was that sword of yours doing, Tubero, in the field of Pharsalus?" or turns to make some invocation such as, 'For I appeal to you, hills and groves of Alba,' or to entreaty that will bring odium on our opponents, as in the cry, 'O Porcian Sempronian laws.' But the term apostrophe is also applied to utterances that divert the attention of the hearer from the question before them, as in the following passage: 'I swore out with the Greeks / At Aulis to uproot the race of Troy.'" [Quintillian IX.ii.38]

It came also to mean an elision, but is now also used to mark the possessive, and greengrocers use it to annoy the prescriptive grammarians amongst us. Please note that I did not say that the CMoS was correct, but that I'd thrown in my lot with its editor.