# the" ---s's" issue **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 18, 1999, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815 "1999-08-18T04:53:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![tipiwoo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/6bbea6/32.png) [@tipiwoo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tipiwoo)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 1999, 4:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815/1 "1999-08-18T04:53:00Z")
I’ve always wondered about this, but I have been given a different answer every time I asked some English teacher. When you have a plural word–or a singular word that ends in “s”, and you want to make it possesive, do you add an apostrophe and another s, or do you just and an apostrophe. Is there a different rule for the “singular word ending in s” and the “plural word ending in s” or are they the same. sorry for the messiness. I’ve gotta get off here quick and am in a hurry. 🙂 * * * tipi 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Markxxx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5daacb/32.png) [@Markxxx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Markxxx)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 1999, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815/2 "1999-08-18T05:00:00Z")
I was always taught Jones’ is wrong and Jones’s is correct. I have been taught a lot of things that I later found out were wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Pete](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3ab097/32.png) [@Pete](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pete)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 1999, 5:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815/3 "1999-08-18T05:05:00Z")
last I heard, either is acceptable. I think Charles’s is so much better, though. Why make an exception? I think it’s a holdover from older English, where you see things like “finish’d” Time to move on and use Charles’s, in my opinion. * * * I don’t know who first said “everyone’s a critic,” but I think it’s a really stupid saying. ---
**Author:** ![Omniscient](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omniscient/32/3290_2.png) [@Omniscient](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omniscient)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 1999, 5:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815/4 "1999-08-18T05:20:00Z")
I’ve learned and accepted that for plural words you always use the “s’” method. Such as “the chicks’ with no bras” meaning multiple women lacking breast support. For singular words ending in “s” you use the “s’s”. Example: “the penis’s appearance drew several frightened looks” ---
**Author:** ![Omniscient](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omniscient/32/3290_2.png) [@Omniscient](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omniscient)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 1999, 5:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815/5 "1999-08-18T05:24:00Z")
That first example is wrong, sorry. A better one is “the chicks’ bras were strewn across the floor of my bedroom” meaning that the entire Dallas Cowboys’ cheerleader squads’ breast support was scattered about my bedroom’s floor. ---
**Author:** ![TubaDiva](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tubadiva/32/507_2.png) [@TubaDiva](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TubaDiva)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 1999, 6:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815/6 "1999-08-18T06:12:00Z")
It is the very first thing addressed in Strunk and White’s _The Elements of Style_, under “Elementary Rules of Usage,” page 1: > [@](#): > > \*\*\*Form the possessive singular of nouns by adding 's. \*\*\*Follow this rule whatever the final consonant. Thus write > > ``` > Charles's friend > Burns's poems > the witch's malice > > ``` > > Exceptions are the possessives of ancient proper names ending in _-es_ and _-is_, the possessive _Jesus’_, and such forms as _for conscience’ sake_. . . Don’t confuse possessive with contraction, as in using _it’s_ and _its_ interchangeably. The first is a contraction of _it is_; the second is possessive. your humble TubaDiva It’s a wise dog that scratches its own fleas. ---
**Author:** ![NanoByte](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ecc23a/32.png) [@NanoByte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NanoByte)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 1999, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815/7 "1999-08-18T06:46:00Z")
For a plural in ‘s’, only the apostrophe is added after the ‘s’ to form the possessive. As far as I know, for a non-plural, the possessive of any word or name ending in ‘s’, ‘se’, ‘z’, ‘ze’, ‘x’, ‘xe’ or ‘ce’ (or any other spelling pronounced as an ‘s’-type of sibilant) can be formed by _either_ just a following apostrophe _or_ same with an ‘s’ thereafter. (I’m sure there are some who say you must make this formation the one way and some the other.) Probably words ending in ‘x’ or ‘xe’ most often take both the apostrophe and the following ‘s’. Ray ---
**Author:** ![Markxxx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5daacb/32.png) [@Markxxx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Markxxx)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 1999, 7:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815/8 "1999-08-18T07:27:00Z")
Finish’d is correct. the ’ sign also indicatd letter(s) left out. thus Int’l, Diff’rent and so forth ---
**Author:** ![C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C_K_Dexter_Haven)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 1999, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815/9 "1999-08-18T13:12:00Z")
Omni, dang right that you’re incorrect. \<\< Such as “the chicks’ with no bras” meaning multiple women lacking breast \>\> In that sentence, the word chicks is plural, there’s no possessive and hence no apostrophe. Correct is: “the chicks with no bras” Apostrophes are used to denote possessive, never to denote simple plurals. ---
**Author:** ![AWB](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/bb73d2/32.png) [@AWB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AWB)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 1999, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815/10 "1999-08-18T14:02:00Z")
What about singular nouns that end in “ss”? E.g., “I was dating Monica Geller, Ross’s sister.” Does the triple “S” make this an exception that should be considered? ---
**Author:** ![Pete](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3ab097/32.png) [@Pete](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pete)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 1999, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815/11 "1999-08-18T19:20:00Z")
No, no, words like “finish’d” and “banish’d” were not written that way to save time/energy by leaving out letters. It’s totally different from modern abbreviations like “int’l” and “gov’t” because it’s not a contraction; it’s used to denote a different pronounciation. If it was written finished or banished, people would often pronounce it as they would “banishèd,” which would be "banish-ed or “bani-shed.” I don’t know why or when we decided to pronounce it as “banisht,” but we did, and that’s what caused nulled the need for the apostrophe. I linked that example with the s’s issue because I think pronouncing “Ross’s” as just “Ross” (That’s Ross[‘s] bike) is dated. So there’s no use for writing Ross’ if everyone says “Ross’s” (Rawsiz) ---
**Author:** ![ChiefScott](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/58f4c7/32.png) [@ChiefScott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChiefScott)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 1999, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815/12 "1999-08-18T19:53:00Z")
Strunk and White rule!! I’m also quite fond of the “AP Styleguide”. ---
**Author:** ![ChiefScott](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/58f4c7/32.png) [@ChiefScott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChiefScott)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 1999, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815/13 "1999-08-18T19:59:00Z")
Here’s a great word which I’ve fought numerous battles over its proper spelling – fo’c’s’le. It’s the only word – that I know of – with three apostophe’s in the dictionary. Oh, it’s the shortened version of forecastle. ---
**Author:** ![ChiefScott](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/58f4c7/32.png) [@ChiefScott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChiefScott)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 1999, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815/14 "1999-08-18T20:00:00Z")
Ah, shit. “Apostrophes” not “apostrophe’s”. ---
**Author:** ![Omniscient](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omniscient/32/3290_2.png) [@Omniscient](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omniscient)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 1999, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815/15 "1999-08-18T20:09:00Z")
CKDextHavn, I know I was totally wrong and therefore corrected myself, is it really necessary for you to kick a man when he’s down? ---
**Author:** ![pluto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f08c70/32.png) [@pluto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pluto)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 1999, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815/16 "1999-08-18T21:35:00Z")
How about the plural form of acronyms? I occasionally do some technical writing and I’m frequently faced with the plural of “XYZ”, or similar. Do I say that “multiple XYZs” are installed or “multiple XYZ’s”? The former conforms more closely to the usual method of forming plurals in English (which technical writing sometimes resembles) but I think the latter is actually clearer, since the extra “s” on the end of an acronym could be mistaken for another acronym. Anyone with strong opinions (and/or rationale) one way or the other? * * * “non sunt multiplicanda entia praeter necessitatem” ---
**Author:** ![C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C_K_Dexter_Haven)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 1999, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815/17 "1999-08-18T21:41:00Z")
Not a kick, Omni, just pointing out the error, because your retraction didn’t make it clear what your goof was. And the use of 's to make plurals is one of my pet peeves. Or should I say, one of my pet peeve’s. ---
**Author:** ![Achernar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e274bd/32.png) [@Achernar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Achernar)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 1999, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815/18 "1999-08-19T00:27:00Z")
Now, the possessive plural of the word “process” is “processes’”, and the contraction of “processes’ is” would be “processes’'s”, correct? (Eg. Aristotle’s actual mathematical calculation’s renown is not as great as his proecesses’'s.") It’s examples like these that make the rules governing apostrophes easy, in my opinion. ---
**Author:** ![RavingMad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/edb3f5/32.png) [@RavingMad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RavingMad)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 1999, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815/19 "1999-08-19T20:23:00Z")
Although either s’ or s’s is acceptable, I personally use only s’ - regardless of whether the word in question was originally a singular or plural. I think adding the additional s after the possessive apostrophe is clunky and awkward. Thus, you have: Jesus’ disciples The business’ new partner The kiss’ sweet smacking sound The Jones’ red car The girls’ new Barbie Often, though, upon finding myself in a situation requiring an s’, I recast the sentence to avoid the problem altogether. The sentence usually comes out more pleasing - and this is _especially_ true when writing for the ear (as in a speech), rather than for the eye. Thus, you end up with: The disciples of Jesus The new partner at the business The sweet smacking sound of the kiss (although the first way is kind of poetic, in an alliterative sort of way). But, I would still write: The Jones’ red car The girls’ new Barbie There’s just no better way to write these. Working around the s’ becomes awkward and forced, as in, “The new Barbie that the girls received,” or “the red car that the Jones own.” In words that don’t end in s, but still have a slightly sibilant sound to them, I use the 's method, as in: Franz’s beautiful beau Pez’s new candy dispenser My ex’s new boyfriend To respond to Pluto, I always add an s - without the apostrophe - to my acronyms . The rules regarding apostrophes are clear, and there’s absolutely no reason to use one when talking about multiples XYZs. The only time apostrophes should be used with an acronym is in a possessive sense, as in “NASA’s failed mission.” The lower case s following a string of upper case letters should suffice to let the reader know the s in not a part of the acronym. (And as a personal rant, the same thing goes for the 1940s, or the '80s. There’s no frigging need for an apostrophe between the last digit and the s. None whatsoever!) And finally, a style guide I recently read (sorry, don’t remember which, but I _think_ it was Microsoft’s guide to tech writing) drew the distinction between acronyms and initialisms. An acronym is a word you can pronounce, such as: NASA FOIA NATO OPEC OSHA Whereas an initialisms is a word in which you must say each individual letter, such as: CIA FBI ATF UN EU * * * ~ Complacency is far more dangerous than outrage ~ ---
**Author:** ![pluto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f08c70/32.png) [@pluto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pluto)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 1999, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815/20 "1999-08-19T20:28:00Z")
Thanks STARK, that clarifies things nicely for me. I will henceforth omit apostrophes. I appreciate the help with acronyms vs. initializations, too. I knew that acronyms wasn’t the exact term I wanted but I was unaware of the term initializations. If only you hadn’t referenced [shudder!] Microsoft (AKA The Great Satan)! [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ss-issue/2815.md?page=2)