The Word Cloud

You know how it is. One fashion designer decides that pink is the new season’s colour at the same time as all the other designers hit on the same idea. And so it was with Persia’s brilliant idea to form this group coinciding with me drafting a blog about grammar and punctuation.

So here is my contribution to the debate so far. I hope that what I have to say will complement what Persia has been saying. There is a lot more to discuss, of course, but let’s start here:

It’s/its

These two words seem to cause more confusion than all the rest put together. The misuse of its/it’s is so widespread that lots of people are now unsure of their correct use. Yet the rule is incredibly simple.

It’s is a contraction of ‘it is’: It’s a lovely day today.

Its is a possessive pronoun: The dog scratched its head.

Apostrophes

I recently saw a television news item about a child that had died, and noticed that one of the cards written to him said To Baby Jame’s. Which means that the widespread confusion about apostrophes has now spread to names. So here goes:

Apostrophes form a variety of functions. Often, they show that two words have been contracted into one, as in it’s above. Usually, the contracted word is is. For instance, here’s [here is], she’s [she is]. Alternatively, we might have isn’t [is not].

Apostrophes also indicate the possessive form of a singular word: the cat’s tail; Ben’s shirt; the coach’s seats.

When you want to show the possessive form of a plural, you simply add the apostrophe to the end of the word: the coaches’ seats; the cats’ tails.

There is a slight complication when showing the possessive form of a proper noun or name ending in an –s. All words with one or two syllables, or longer words where the emphasis is on the penultimate syllable, end in ’s: for instance, Charles’s hat; St Thomas’s Hospital; Hicks’s Cough Syrup. This same rule applies to longer words where the accent is on the second to last syllable. However, the possessive form of classical names ends in -s’: for instance, Mars’ actions; Venus’ influence. You also use -s’ for names that end in a –iz sound: for instance, Moses’.

If the apostrophe appears in the middle of a word, it tells us that something is missing from that word. These examples are less common: ‘the ship’s fo’c’sle’; ‘the entr’acte was far too long’.

You do not add an apostrophe to a word that consists entirely of capital letters, such as CD or DVD. So you have a collection of CDs and DVDs. When you receive honours for your services to literature you’ll belong to an elite group of people with OBEs.

Plurals

There are no apostrophes in plural words, unless they are in the possessive form (see above). Full stop.

Normally, you turn a singular word into a plural by adding an –s. For instance, card becomes cards; orange becomes oranges, aura becomes auras.

Sometimes, you have to add an –es, simply because the word would be difficult to pronounce without it. For instance, coach becomes coaches; Jones becomes Joneses.

Unfortunately, this being the English language, things then become more complicated. If a noun ends in –y and the preceding letter is a vowel, the plural is –s. For instance: monkey becomes monkeys.

If the noun ends in –y and the preceding letter is a consonant, in the plural form you drop the –y and add –ies. For instance: lady becomes ladies; shanty becomes shanties. However, it’s a different story for proper nouns: for instance, Mr and Mrs Hardy become the Hardys.

And then there are the words ending in –f, which are another exception. You drop the –f and add –ves. For instance: leaf becomes leaves; sheaf becomes sheaves. So far so good. But not all words ending in –f behave like this: for instance, chief becomes chiefs and chef becomes chefs.

Words ending in –o either become plural by adding –s (for instance, kangaroo becomes kangaroos) or –es (tomato becomes tomatoes). There doesn’t seem to be a rule about this, unfortunately.

So please would you just clarify for me, is there an apostrphe at the end of the word eyes, as in her eyes?

Very explicit, Spangles. Thanks.
And Edwina, No, not if you're just talking about her eyes. Only if you were referring to her eyes' colouring, for example (or to the squint in one of her eyes: her eye's squint.)

Very Interesting, Spangly-one, thanks.

I didn't know the nuances of words ending in -y, and now I do, so that's wonderful.
The classical names example was a surprise - Charles's vs Moses'.

The -f ending bothers me though - consider roof and roofs/rooves.
We have hoof and hooves, elf and elves, and as you say, loaf and loaves, but I am led to believe that the plural of roof is roofs - whereas we really do pronounce it rooves.
I'm guessing that the plural of "spoof" is "spoofs" - but then that's how I'd pronounce it, too.
The roofs have beaten me.

As an aside, the apostrophe in the genitive (possessive) case still denotes a missing letter, doesn't it? Earlier English would have put an "e" where the apostrophe now resides. Wouldn't old scripts have referred to "the cates whiskers" and "the maidenes honour?" Or am I getting muddled?

And how about words adopted from foreign languages? I cringe at signs outside sandwich bars, advertising "paninis"; panini is already a plural word - one panino, two panini. So you can't correctly order "a panini, please", any more than you can have "a children".

Heigh ho.

Whisks

Edwina, Tony is spot on. There is no apostrophe after eyes because it's a plural and therefore it doesn't need an apostrophe.

Oh, those -f endings are coming thick and fast now - how about sheaf/sheaves? Shelf/shelves? Leaf/Leaves?
Shut up, Whisks

Yes, the apostrophe is a relatively new-fangled invention in the English language. Relatively. It began in the 1580s, although the concept had entered English in the 1530s from the Gk. apostrophos (prosoidia) "(the accent of) turning away", as in a digression to another subject during a speech.
And, if 1580s looks odd, you can always use an apostrophe.

Re plurals: Can anyone say why 'woman' is pronounced woo'man, but 'women' is pronounced wi'men?

Interesting question Tony! This is fun!

Ok, deep breath: The words both stem from Old English; the original spellings were wimman (singular), and wimmen (plural). Both had the original "tighter" W-sound, though only the plural retains that in modern pronunciation; the singular took on the more rounded W-sound of Middle English*. Both forms replaced the OE "wif", which we still find in the term for a married wimman. Interestingly, Carribbean friends of mine still retain the original pronunciations of the OE, whether they know it or not! It's a dialect coincidence, but still interesting. It would be interesting to hear how New Foundlers pronounce the variations, as linguistically they still have the closest accent to Old English of any people group.
* There are other examples of differences, especially between Scottish and English pronunciation, such as "work"; in Scotland it would be pronounced closer to the Germanic / Norse roots, "werk", which is a closer equivilant to the tighter vowel of OE.

Interesting, Persia.
I'm from Northern Ireland, which has much Scottish influence in its speech. I have much 'debate' with my English wife over pronunciations. She makes a most delicious scone (rhyming with stone) but I only eat a scone (rhyming with gone). When we go out for a walk over the moore (pronounced muer), she goes over the 'more'. Perhaps we'll vistit a castle (rhyming with hassle), but she'll be in a caaa'sil. And work? How else would you pronounce it other than 'werk'? Honestly - why can't the English teach their children how to speak? Come back Professor Higgins, all is forgiven.

I had a good laugh Tony! My husband and I have the added bonus of Swiss-German to throw in! Back when I was first learning S-G, about 2 years after getting High German within my grasp, my husband & I were in Valais, the southern canton bordering Italy. Historically they have some of the oldest Germanic dialects because they were isolated by the Alps from influencing changes, and even Swiss from (fra', in Scottish) other cantons have difficulties understanding them. My hubby wanted to demonstrate this to me, so he asked the waitress in the restaurant what the weather had been like the past week. She told him, and left to fill our order. He said, "See, you probably didn't understand anything!" But I had understood every word - because it sounded like Scottish to my ears! I proudly interpreted for my Swiss husband.

That's amazing, Persia!

You make it sound as though there is only one Scottish accent! The different regions have *drastically* different accents, just as in other countries.

Lennich, I know there are different dialects of Scottish, just as there are different dialects of Swiss German, and different dialects of sign language! I'm assuming people will figure that out on their own.

There's a lot to be said for local accents and pronunciations.
How people string words together. But there are some strong accents that are beyond me, as my accent seems to be beyond others.
At a market near sherwood I asked a stall keeper the price of a garment - 4 times, then my friend asked in his local accent and - ping! Lightbulb - comprehension. ( I didn't think I was that bad).

I've had occasions when I've made up my own words and wondered why they didn't sound right. When I was very young I kept saying the word 'presact' - knew it sounded wrong but was never corrected. Years later realised I'd put 2 words together 'precise' and 'exact'.

I watch names on signs changing regular as new people come along and shorten them more and more, I suspect because they are following current trends of speech, how welsh words are pronounced in particular. Bont-y-ty-pridd, becomes Ponypridd becomes Ponty'. Rhydyfelyn, becomes Rhydfelin.

Do you also find more and more people write as they speak? the most popular thing I get in my emails at work from folk is 'have' replaced by 'of'. ie 'I would of done it but I didn't have time'.
Does this annoy anyone else?

But Persia and Spangles are the experts.

One of my major difficulties is with 'ough' and 'augh' sounding words.

Is there a rule of thumb on them?
I get confused with what is 'augh' and 'ough'

cough, caught, thought, bought.

Why are some 'augh' and others 'ough'?

Another question for Persia and Spangles

Which came first 'ise' or 'ize'
I always took the latter to be the americanisation/americanization

Would love to know the truth behind this one out of simple curiosity please.

:o)
Nibs

Hi Nibs

A young gallant once said to his sweetheart, "Darling, I want to come to you, be with you, beside you, on you , in you - "
"My love," she interrupted, "are you prepositioning me?"

Tony, you're on fire, today!

Tony, that is absolutely brilliant!

Thanks for that Spangles.
You've taught me a new word - thankyou. I like that one. Paroxysm (in short - pain haha!) nice one. I never thought of that explanation.
But now you've pointed it out to me it makes perfect sense how it's come about. It is obvious to me now that it's a lot easier for folk to type 'of' than write 've, because those unfamiliar with a querty keyboard wouldn't go looking for the ' ' ' apostrophe, it's easier for them to change the word completely, it must be, mustn't it? isn't it? Mmm!

They annoy me so much because I'm trying hard to write correctly, but in work people don't care. Plus you may or may not believe it, but as I have a new contract due to this migration of companies (complicated situation) I have a new contract, and on reading that contract found no less than 27 spelling errors. Is this a record I wonder? I sigh in disbelief and think if these are how legal and official documents are drawn up, I don't stand a chance, I'm fighting against a tide of the ever decaying written word.

Thank God I've found you lot to help me do it right.

Very good Tony, you're on the ball there.

the use of the word 'Momentarily'

My sister-in-law is often commenting on its misuse? But the examples she highlights I can't appreciate why they are wrong.

one sentence kind of goes like the following: -
'They will be with you momentarily.' - is this correct or wrong or ok???

would appreciate samples of what makes this word right or wrong in a sentence please - anyone, any ideas...

K rgds
Nibs

It's so nice to find someone else who is driven bats by misspellings, although I think 27 in a legal document is almost breathtaking in its incompetence. (Wow, what a splenetic phrase for a snowy February morning.) Especially as it was presumably typed on a computer using a word-processing package that would have highlighted the errors.