# Grammar question: multiple possession **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 13, 2005, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grammar-question-multiple-possession/326077 "2005-10-13T15:46:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Strinka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/strinka/32/512_2.png) [@Strinka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Strinka)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2005, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grammar-question-multiple-possession/326077/1 "2005-10-13T15:46:22Z")
Well, the title might not be very descriptive. Suppose Bob and Bill both own a car. Should the car be referred to as Bob and Bill’s car or Bob’s and Bill’s car? ---
**Author:** ![Jpeg\_Jones](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/4bbf92/32.png) [@Jpeg\_Jones](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jpeg_Jones)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2005, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grammar-question-multiple-possession/326077/2 "2005-10-13T16:53:53Z")
I think the thing to do would be to try as hard as you can to make it work with “their car”. Failing that, I don’t know. Personally, I’d go for “Bob and Bill’s car”. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2005, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grammar-question-multiple-possession/326077/3 "2005-10-13T17:08:18Z")
It’s the custom to attach the “-'s” for possession to the last element in a phrase, although if there’s a way you can rephrase the sentence to avoid the slightly awkward construction, it’s a good idea. Shakespeare makes reference to “sing[ing] the King of Spain’s beard” in one of his plays (granted this is a different sort of phrase than “Bob and Bill’s car”) and most people would understand this as the beard belonging to the King of Spain, not to a man who “reigns over Spain’s beard.” Likewise the example sentence would be understood to mean “the car belonging to Bob and Bill.” ---
**Author:** ![guizot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guizot/32/3636_2.png) [@guizot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/guizot)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2005, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grammar-question-multiple-possession/326077/4 "2005-10-13T17:09:23Z")
AFAIK, “Bill and Bob’s car” is the accepted form. There is no real “official” grammatical justification, other than that “Bill and Bob” is a compound noun. So when you say “I gave the car to Bill and Bob,” it’s understood that they both received the car and now own it jointly. [Bill and Bob] got the car. It’s the car of [Bill and Bob]. (Not: It’s the car of Bill and of Bob.) Also, “Bill’s and Bob’s car” just sounds awkward. ---
**Author:** ![Rhythmdvl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85f322/32.png) [@Rhythmdvl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhythmdvl)\ **Post date:** [October 13, 2005, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grammar-question-multiple-possession/326077/5 "2005-10-13T17:41:24Z")
> [@](#): > > 7.24 > _Two nouns as a unit._ Closely linked nouns are considered a single unit in forming the possessive when the entity “possessed” is the same for both; only the second element takes the possessive form. When the entities are different, both nouns take the possessive form. See also 5.27. > > my aunt and uncle’s house > Gilbert and Sullivan’s _lolanthe_ > Minneapolis and Saint Paul’s transportation system > > _but_ > my aunt’s and uncle’s specific talents > New York’s and Chicago’s transportation systems > Our friends’ and neighbors’ children and > [@](#): > > 5.26 > _Joint and separate possessives._ If two or more nouns share possession, the last known takes the possessive ending. For example, _Peter and Harriet’s correspondence_ refers to the correspondence between Peter and Harriet. If two or more nouns possess something separately, each noun takes its own possessive ending. For example, _Peter’s and Harriet’s correspondence_ refers to Peter’s correspondence and also to Harriet’s correspondence. ---
**Author:** ![roger\_thornhill](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d9b06d/32.png) [@roger\_thornhill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/roger_thornhill)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2005, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grammar-question-multiple-possession/326077/6 "2005-10-14T02:33:23Z")
> [@Polycarp](#): > > Shakespeare makes reference to “sing[ing] the King of Spain’s beard” in one of his plays I simply must defend the honour of my ancestor and namesake by pointing out that it was Francis Drake who \*singed \* the King of Spain’s beard by means of a surprise attack on Cadiz. As for his vocal skills, I must plead ignorance. Regarding ‘Peter’s and Harriet’s correspondence’ and the convoluted explanation/justification thereof, it’s simpler and much clearer to add one word and write ‘Peter’s correspondence, and Harriet’s correspondence’ ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2005, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grammar-question-multiple-possession/326077/7 "2005-10-14T04:45:06Z")
> [@roger thornhill](#): > > I simply must defend the honour of my ancestor and namesake by pointing out that it was Francis Drake who \*singed \* the King of Spain’s beard by means of a surprise attack on Cadiz. As for his vocal skills, I must plead ignorance. Yes, but when he was in the process of doing it, what present participle did he use? (Avoiding a Whitmanesque “I sing the beard electric”! ;)) As for Peter and Harriet and their epistolary activities, I suspect that was just a bit of Wimsey thrown in. (As Scripture tells us, “Be doers of the word, and not Sayers only!”) ---
**Author:** ![roger\_thornhill](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d9b06d/32.png) [@roger\_thornhill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/roger_thornhill)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2005, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grammar-question-multiple-possession/326077/8 "2005-10-14T05:25:24Z")
According to your own Merriam Webster, ‘singe’ is always rendered ‘singeing’ in the ‘-ing’ form: > [@](#): > > Main Entry: singe > Pronunciation: 'sinj > Function: transitive verb > Inflected Form(s): singed; singe·ing /'sin-ji[ng]/ > to burn superficially or lightly : SCORCH; especially : to remove the hair, down, or fuzz from usually by passing rapidly over a flame And I think you owe the bard an apology too.