Apostrophes or is it apostrophe's?

[Veronica]

Our PTA printed out posters and hung them all around the school to advertise a fundraiser. There were so many errors in it, I wanted to use it for daily editing practice with my students. The biggest was the misuse of apostrophes. Every time a word ended in s, there was an apostrophe - sometimes before the s and sometimes after. There shouldn't have been any apostrophes at all.

I KNOW I'm a grumpy grammar grinch, but apostrophe misuse is beginning to get to me. So I present a min lesson - it's the 5th grade teacher in me.

You don't need an apostrophe if all you are doing is making something plural - more than one.

You do need an apostrophe to show possession - ownership. If it's only one owner the apostrophe goes before the s. If it's a plural owner, the apostrophe goes after the s. The only exception to this I can think of, is the word its. This "its" is the possessive one.

You do need an apostrophe in contractions to replace the missing letters.

Why does this matter? It matters because writing is communication. Rules of grammar, spelling and punctuation were developed to make communication easier. Communication does not occur in the mind of the writer; it occurs in the mind of your reader.

Yes, that is exactly what I tell my students every day!

Veronica

PS This post isn't intended to be hurtful or unkind, merely instructional. I still recall how I relieved I felt when I FINALLY figured the difference between then and than. Many thanks to Mrs. Woodbrey, my awesome Latin teacher, who actually took the time to explain it to me.

[OakLeaf]

Communication does not occur in the mind of the writer; it occurs in the mind of your reader.

I love this' line!

[maillotpois]

Can't believe the PTO didn't grammar check - what a terrible example!!

Em's only remaining apostrophe error is occasional omission when she intends a possessive. I corrected a few of those last night in her honors world history work. It'll sink in. Eventually.

[Eden]

My question is why does my spell checker dislike "women's"..... I get it that womens is not right as women is already plural, but something can belong to a group of women..... I always see the little red dots when I want to write about "women's racing" or "women's fields"... to call them woman's seems more incorrect to me... (and so that it is not sexist it also dislikes men's)....

(I think I just answered my own question... it should be women' to follow the pattern of not putting an 's on something that already is plural, but IMHO that's kind of stupid, because you cannot speak an '.... so in speaking to someone you would have to say the s to sound right and be clear.... apparently British English allows 's on men's and women's - I agree with the Brits)

[Irulan]

Examples illustrated here.

http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/apostro.asp

I still have to mentally do "is it a contraction?" for "its" vs "it's".

[Eden]

ohhhhh she disagrees with my spell checker and allows women's.... I think I'll keep using it despite being harassed by the little red dots.

[snapdragen]

Now...(love my elipses too.) Let's get this back on track and teach me some more 'o this grammer stuff. I'm not going to delete any of the off track posts, I'll leave that up to the posters themselves . (Oh god, do I need any more apostrophes?)


........... whee!!!

[OakLeaf]

I finally got around to reading Eats, Shoots & Leaves last year. I didn't expect to enjoy it as much as I did, but it's a very enlightening read.

Just remember ... in a world without punctuation, stuff like this happens all the time.

But folks like Shakespeare communicated their ideas fine without strictly standardized punctuation (or spelling).

[snapdragen]

I finally got around to reading Eats, Shoots & Leaves last year. I didn't expect to enjoy it as much as I did, but it's a very enlightening read.

Just remember ... in a world without punctuation, stuff like this happens all the time. But folks like Shakespeare communicated their ideas fine without strictly standardized punctuation (or spelling).

That would be an interesting job interview..