i18n@... wrote:
>
> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> >
> > > Is there a reference for the "newfangled" usage? I rarely see it and
> > > always consider it incorrect, but I am willing to stand corrected....
> >
> > Chicago Manual of Style, at least since the 13th ed. Always use 's
> > except on names that end with the "eez" sound (Aristophanes') and a few
> > stereotyped cases -- in Jesus' name, for conscience' sake (I think there
> > are half a dozen exceptions).
>
> I don't have that book handy (but will take a look next time I am
> someplace that does). But you inspired me to search online and I found
> this at www.chicagomanualofstyle.org:
>
> http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/cmosfaq.html (site has frames -
> search on apostrophe and then scroll to the following passage)
> -------------------
> Q. When indicating possession of a word that ends in s, is it correct to
> repeat the s after using an apostrophe? For example, which is correct:
> Dickens novel or Dickenss novel?
>
> A. Either is correct, though CMS 15 recommends the latter. Please
> consult 7.1822 for a full discussion of the rules for forming the
> possessive of proper nouns, including exceptions and examples. For a
> simpler statement of the rule, see paragraph 5.26. For a discussion of
> the alternative practice of simply adding an apostrophe to form the
> possessive of proper nouns ending in s, see paragraph 7.23.
> -------------------
>
> So your explanation and summary about is incomplete for someone looking
> to it for practical usage info although it does serve as an answer to my
> original question seeking a citation.
What, "Barry i18n," is your problem with me??????
A question was asked (not by you), and I provided the answer.
CMS has become almost uselessly non-prescriptive in the 14th and
especially the 15th ed., and "either is correct" is not a useful
response for someone who wants to know what the standard is.
> I wonder if other Style Guides have adapted similarly as this usage does
> not seem very widespread in my readings ....
>
> >
> > > > But I don't see how it can be other than kids' activities.
> > >
> > > I think "kids activities" is kind of colloquial to begin with... stuff
> > > that lids do on a playground could be "kids activities" or "kid
> > > activities" without loss of meaning or nuance I think. The latter would
> > > be the plural of the noun phrase "kid activity" I think.
> >
> > Sounds Brit.
>
> Maybe - it is idiomatic to my ears at least.
>
> How about "adult activities" such as "when you are 18, you will be able
> to participate in adult activities such as voting"?
Adjective. "Kid activities" doesn't seem possible. Cf. "kid stuff" but
not "adult stuff." Cf. "child's play."
Why are you dragging this off-topic thread on and on? Someone,
recognizing that it was off-topic, asked the question, it was answered,
move on.
--
Peter T. Daniels
grammatim@...