Where does the apostrophe go with a parenthetical epithet?

Factual Questions
1

The subject might be a little confusing, so I’ll give examples. If a catamite belongs to Alexander the Great, it is “Alexander the Great’s catamite.” That’s simple. What if I need “the Great” to be in parentheses? If there are two Alexanders, I might say something like “Alexander (the Great) often found difficulties when operating in modern-day Turkey.” That’s easy, too.

The problem is when I want to combine the two. If I can’t simply remove the brackets, how can I make a possesive out of it? Is it:

A) Alexander (the Great)'s catamite,
B) Alexander’s (the Great) catamite,
or
C) Alexander (the Great’s) catamite?

2

A.

3

Option A look’s right to me. It’s an awkward situation, though. I’d rephrase if possible.

4

Oh hell. “Looks”, not “look’s”.

Maybe best not to take my advice here at all. :slight_smile:

5

Well if we’re simply voting, I say B, but I will offer my reasons nonetheless. A Parenthetical expression offeres further information, but the sentence should be fine with out it. If you remove the parenthetical expression from C you get an improper sentence. If you remove it from A you get a “dangling” possessive not attached to anything.

6

Read the sentence aloud to see why it’s A. If you remove the parenthetical remark, you can also remove the spaces on either side of it.

7

Heh. It takes a “Great” person to admit mistakes.
Don’t quote me on this. :smiley:

8

Thanks. This isn’t for any particular point, but just something that’s bothered me in the past, and especially when I’m taking notes. I prefer “A” myself, since it reads well.

9

Another point where it’s helpful is when you want to combine a person’s “number” and their epithet: “Frederick II (the Great)'s army shocked Europe.”

10

I always try to rephrase around that situation, e.g., “Frederick II (the Great) shocked Europe with his army” or “Frederick II (the Great) built an army that shocked Europe.”

I don’t know which of the phrases in the O.P. would be “correct,” but A “feels” the best. Again, I’d tend to rephrase it, preferably avoiding awkward structures like “the catamite of Alexander (the Great).”

I know, rephrasing around situations like that is grammatically lazy, but it’s still what I do.

11

:confused:

What an odd thing to say.

12

I agree, InvisibleWombat, that it’s best to rephrase. However, I like being prepared, and now I am. This is especially useful in high-stress situations like exams.

13

catamite: A boy kept for…

Oh, my, the things I learn here. Did he really?

14

Most likely, but it was hardly unusual at the time.

15

I got chastised in another grammar thread for suggesting that the best way to deal with a situation you’re unsure about is to rephrase around it. The grammar police told me that I was being lazy, and if I wasn’t sure how to do it I should bloody well go look it up and learn how to use the language better.

16

Sheer nonsense. If the grammar (though I’d more put this particular issue down as one of style) is sticky to the point that it’s not clear to the writer, then even if the writer gets it “right” it’ll stick out to the reader and distract them from what you’re communicating. Rephrasing to find a more naturalistic way of putting it is an essential tool for a decent writer.

17

Re the OP: no doubt in my mind, A is correct.

[hijack]

Whereas that sentence is gramatically correct, I find it rather jarring chronologically, at least if you’re referring to this guy. Unless he had a time machine, AtG never operated in “modern-day Turkey”. If you mean what I think you mean, you’re better off saying something like …“in the area that is now part of Turkey”.
[/hijack]