Re: Apostrophe

["Parker, Cassandra M. (EXCH)" <CMPARKER -at- INTERMEDIA -dot- COM>]

Damien,

Thanks for the English lesson.  I feel proud to say I have been using
all of the apostrophes correctly but this is one of those messages I
plan to keep for future reference for others that work with me and
myself as well.

Thanks again,

CP
===================================================================

>----------
>From:  Damien Braniff[SMTP:Damien_Braniff -at- PAC -dot- CO -dot- UK]
>Sent:  Tuesday, September 23, 1997 4:09 AM
>To:    TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
>Subject:       Re: Apostrophe
>
>Hope this is useful to those who expressed an interest.
>
>The following is precis of the letter/article.
>
>Re ?Charlies Dead (or is he?)?, Liz Hale in the March issue of the
>Communicator
>
>I must first admit to getting slightly peeved when I see the apostrophe
>mis-used/not used.
>
>I feel that this mis-use is symptomatic of a general lowering of standards
>in written English.  I wasn?t one of those who did English at college, just
>the basics to ?O? level at school where basic grammar and punctuation were
>taught.  Some say that as English is a ?living language? and that we don?t
>have to worry about such things as grammar, spelling, punctuation and so on
>as long as the meaning is clear.  However, as in many things, appearances
>are important - try going for an office job in scruffy jeans!  In the same
>way, text which is neatly presented and easily understood should always be
>the aim.
>
>I see the apostrophe, along with other punctuation marks, as the ?roadsigns
>and road markings? of the language, designed to make it easier to read and
>understand.  When driving from A to B, roadsigns (STOP, speed limits,
>whites lines etc.) are not necessary but they generally ease the trip, even
>if some people tend to ignore them!  Because they are ignored or not
>understood by some does not in any way make them redundant.
>
>I agree that I can read her examples and make sense of them but I do not
>want to have to read something twice or even three times before the meaning
>is clear.  Proper use of punctuation, including the apostrophe, makes for
>clarity.  It is especially important in technical documentation which, if
>misunderstood, could have quite catastrophic results.
>
>A final point, her use of the example ?...Canary Islands...? and ?...Easter
>Islands...? would seem to imply that geography was better taught at her
>school than English as she assumes that everyone knows that one is singular
>and the other plural!
>
>
>
>Damien Braniff, MISTC
>
>
>
>
>
>PS  For those who wish to know when the apostrophe should be used there is
>a brief description, put together by a colleague at work, on the following
>page.  It is also covered in the excellent book ?Full Marks? by John
>Kirkman.
>
>                 The apostrophe - an easy guide to its use
>
>
>
>The poor old misunderstood apostrophe, how it is abused.  It is, however, a
>useful friend to have and quite easy to use correctly if you consider a few
>simple rules.
>
>
>
>When you should use it
>
>For possession:
>
>e.g. if you are describing a phone that rings too loud...
>
>     Phil's phone should be turned down. The phone belongs to Phil.
>
>Note...  If the word ends in s, you have option of dropping the last "s".
>
>     Leeds' latest defeat was at the hands of Manchester United, or
>
>     Leeds's latest defeat was at the hands of Manchester United.
>
>
>
>There is one exception (this is English after all!). When something belongs
>to  it,  use  its  not it's. e.g. The dog was unhappy, its tail had dropped
>off.
>
>
>
>When concatenating two words
>
>e.g. You are is shortened to you're.
>
>     "You are coming with me," becomes "you're coming with me."
>
>The apostrophe is always placed where the letters have been removed.
>
>e.g.  Did  not,  becomes didn't; the not loses the "o", so is replaced with
>the apostrophe.
>
>       EX:  Didn't
>
>
>When not to use it
>
>For plurals; ever!  If there's ambiguity, word the sentence differently.
>
>The  plural of  PCB is PCBs, not PCB's.  PCB's means something belongs to a
>PCB.  The plural of PMR is PMRs, not PMR's. Otherwise plural and possession
>are  written  the same way, which, especially when you're reading technical
>documents that you don't fully understand, can be very confusing.
>
>One common mistake
>
>Your and you're.
>
>Your, is for possession; it's your book.  The book belongs to you.
>
>You're  is  short  for you are. "Your coming with me" is often seen, and is
>always wrong!
>
>
>
>
>
>(c) The apostrophe police 1996 zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
>
> TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
>to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot-  Send commands
>   to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
>  Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/  or search and
>browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html
>

 TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot-  Send commands
   to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
  Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/  or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html