For grammar and punctuation nerds only

Please note, this is meant for discussion and is not meant as criticism!

The apostrophe is often used in a terrible way, but I am not going to discuss the "carrot's" type mistake. Where I am puzzled is the way that many people, who are otherwise grammatically sound, use an apostrophe for plural forms after acronyms or numbers. I am thinking for example, of a recent story published here which referred to "NCO's". It would be an obvious error to say "non-commissioned officer's" as a plural, so why use the apostrophe on the shortened form? Similarly, using letters we say "e nineteen nineties", so why "1990's" ? I would suggest that the only correct forms here are "NCOs", the "1990s" etc.

The other issue people have is when a name ends with 's'. We see "Dickens' novels", when the correct form is "Dickens's", but after that I have some genuine questions. One notable exception to the rule above is when there is a reference to a religious figure, so we have "Jesus' followers", but does this apply to all religious figures and all religions (for example Moses or Zeus) and would it apply to anyone in the Bible, (e.g. Judas)? Then, to complicate things further, what about place names that have religious connotations and end in 's' (e.g. St Albans or St Andrews). Are they "St Andrews' famous golf courses" or "St Andrews's famous golf courses"?

I did warn you it was for nerds!

I agree that "NCO's" doesn't seem strictly correct, but I think I would normally use it because it is easier to read, "NCOs" could easily be misread as "NCOS". The same for "1990's."

As for names ending in "s", I don't think religion makes any difference. I don't agree that "Dickens' " is any less correct than "Dickens's". To me, "Dickens' " would suggest a more competent writer or speaker.

Here's another one for discussion: Since an apostrophe can also denote missing characters, shouldn't we write "sha'n't" rather than "shan't" ?

If you feel that "Dickens' " is correct, then the use depends solely on the final letter of the word and not whether it is singular or plural. Would you say " The bus' front wheel had a puncture" ?

I don't understand some of your other comments. Why would an apostrophe make something easier to read and what could 1990s be misread as?

Grammar rules may change with time and usage. I recently typed "1990's" and the grammar program I use (ProWritingAid) prompted me to check on apostrophes with dates. Which led me to online grammar gurus & websites.
I like the explanation that "the 1990's" refers to something related to the specific year 1990 and not to the whole decade. Nevertheless, I kept 1990's to refer music popular in a general several year time period.
That said, "NCO's" and "the 1990's" referring to the whole decade seem clearer than NCOs and 1990s for readers to me. When I get rich enough to afford a professional proofer, I'll let her or him recommend. LOL

No, I definitely wouldn't say that. I think perhaps Dickens being a proper noun makes a difference. If you take the politician Greg Hands for example, he is a singular person but his surname is a plural noun. "Dickens" could be seen in a similar light. But it may be as much a question of convention as of logic, and of what is easy to say, and what sounds clumsy. To me, "Dickens's" sounds clumsy.

With acronyms and numbers, I simply meant the apostrophe makes them clearer by acting as a separator. Perhaps less so with numbers, but 1990s could conceivably be misread as 19905, especially in handwriting.

I've recently read a book (Lewis Carrol's 'Game of Logic') in which can't was written ca'n't - so punctuation has changed over the last hundred years!

"Cannot" is an interesting one. You'd have to decide which of the two n's you'd omitted. If the first, it would be "ca'n't", if the second, "can't".

I've just noticed I used "n's" in the above. Isn't that a lot clearer than if I'd said "... which of the two ns you'd ..."?

solbond, I am a little confused by your above question. In this case, I assume the apostrophe is used to denote possession. Does St. Andrews really own the golf course? St. Andrews was martyred in the year 60 AD.


Fortunately, in English we have multiple ways to indicate possession. I would say:

The front wheel on the bus had a puncture.

To me, anyhow, the above sentence is more descriptive as it clearly connects the front wheel with the bus, but also indicates that the puncture occured when the wheel was mounted on the bus.

Tiredny

St Andrew (without the 's') was martyred in 60AD. The town of St Andrews really does own the golf courses.

AlanBarr

When 'Hands' becomes a surname, it has a singular form. You wouldn't say 'Greg Hands are on the television'. Similarly, some place names seem to look like plurals, but they aren't (Naples, Brussels).
This is about writing, not how things sound. In spoken English the final sound of a word often converges with the initial sound of the next word, so Dickens's son could possibly be read with only one 's' sound. It doesn't mean that you can alter the written form.

If you confuse 'She was born in the 1990s' with 'She was born in the 19905,' I think you might re-read it.