Lois & Clark Forums Forums Fan Fiction Fanfic Related More fun with punctuation

I'm not sure why I'm so enchanted by punctuation lately. Somewhere, my ninth grade English teacher is probably still in despair... Cheer up, Mr. Sant, eventually I actually did start to care about what goes where and why.

Sex and the Semicolon

Now I have backup the next time a GE tells me that Lois' should be Lois's. It just looks so cluttered (and sibilant) with that extra "s" to me.

I pretty much cracked up over this.
JD

The Associated Press' 2009 Stylebook says to do it as Lois' ... in case you're wondering how they do it at The Daily Planet.

I agree with you, Sue; the extra s looks cluttered, and when I beta or GE, I always remove it.

And just because I am being anal, can I say that along those lines, I hate when people take a last name that ends in S, such as Strauss, and try to suggest that Strauss' would be the plural form? It's Strausses, as odd as it looks; the apostrophe is a possessive.

OK, journalism lesson over.

But it isn't an extra s!

You write "the Kents' farm." Kents is plural, and you don't need an extra s to make it plural possessive. Furthermore (perhaps more importantly), you don't say Kents's. You say Kents'.

In Lois's case, however, it's not a plural possessive. It's the possessive of a singular which happens to end in s. And you do pronounce the "extra" s.

I know both are "technically" correct (and we've had at least one poll thread about this ), but Lois's is the one that makes sense to me. They just leave it off in journalism because it saves one letter of precious space (and, back in the day, a bit of effort on the part of the typesetter). However, since both are technically acceptable, it's not really right for a GE to "correct" it. (I used to, until that was pointed out to me.)

Paul, who has no particular opinion on semicolons

You're right, Paul. Official Archive policy on this one is that it's the choice of the author as to which variation on this one they choose. Both are considered correct and GEs should always be guided by what the author wants in this instance. Both are acceptable to the Archive.

Personally, I went through a period when I refused to use the 'extra' s for the same reasons Sue and Jenn, do. It just looked clunky to me. Then, about five years ago, I suddenly reversed course and began using it. Who can tell why? I work in mysterious ways.

LabRat

PS - I'm moving this into Fanfic Related - for no other reason than it's always been traditionally where matters of grammar and punctuation are discussed because they do have some connection to writing.

_____________________

BARTLET: Sweden has a 100 per cent literacy rate, Leo. A hundred percent! How do they do that?
LEO: Well, maybe they don't and they also can't count.

The West Wing - The Drop-In

That's actually not true. At my paper, at least, we go with the s' for readibility purposes, not space.

Believe me, there are moments when I'd love to throw in an extra s ... or r ... or m (yeah, that's a good one because it takes up a lot of space; as does an upper-case T).

Hmmph... As long as you’re consistent, I never correct this when I GE. But my preference is Lois’ because I also think Lois’s looks cluttered.

Yep. But lots and lots of people get this confused, and I believe there have even been some discussions about this on the board before. And what exactly is the plural of Charles? Charleses? (It is.) Hehe. Looks stupid doesn’t it? I’d probably try to find some way around it.

I must admit that I’ve been tempted, but then I remember my 3rd grade teacher who taught us Lois’ and at that time the other was *not* acceptable. We had a Charles in our class and she kept having to explain it over and over because he didn’t get why it shouldn’t be Charles’s rather than Charles’. I can just imagine that he now feels triumphant.

I'm declaring myself in the "unrepentant fan of the semicolon" group. I don't care what other people say; in my writing (and thinking) style, semicolons work marvelously. (Yes, I did that on purpose!)

Another tireless defender of the semi-colon here, and just as tireless a defender of the hyphen

But I also have to add a staunch defence of Lois's. The way I was taught is that plural nouns don't attract an extra 's' for possessives - ergo 'the Johnsons' house' - but singular nouns do. We don't say 'the Johnsonses', but we do pronounce the possessive Lois as 'Lois's'. Focus on the sound of the words for a moment: we don't say 'Lois car', we say 'Loises car'.

And LabRat is correct: the reason the 's is dropped in style guides is for space-saving reasons, just as the principal style guides for publishers also recommend omitting the serial comma.


Wendy

If anyone wants to get a full plate of semicolon use, they have only to read Naomi Novik's "His Majesty's Dragon" series. It's about Temerarire, a war dragon in the time of English sailing ships and Nelson and Trafalgar. The author is American, but models her language after the novels of Patrick O'Brian; thus giving the modern novel a real feel for the era of sailing ships. An example, to wit:
(pg. 96 of "Empire of Ivory.")
I think that is why current writers do not like the semicolon. It effectively puts us in mind of when men "made a leg" (i.e. bowed deeply, extending the right leg forward. This works best visually with knee breeches and hose; looking quite ridiculous in a modern suit.)
Hmmm. I'm in a punctuation mood too!

Artemis