# at the chemist's; at the butcher's, at the petrol station's



## Egoexpress

Hi there again,

I've got another question regarding the usage of "at a place".

What can you buy at the chemist's; at the butcher's, at the petrol station's; at the stationery's?

Do you sometimes omit the 's when you are sloppy?

Thank you!


----------



## bibliolept

The apostrophe-S designates possession. "Chemist's" is the chemist's shop; "butcher's" refers to the butcher's shop.

I wouldn't use the possessive for "What can you buy at the petrol station" because "petrol station" is already the name of the place.

That said, it would be helpful for you to explain your question further. Are you talking about ignoring the use of the possessive case in writing or in speaking? What is the context?


----------



## pepperfire

Depending on the sentence... I would never say or write "at the butcher's" unless I followed it by "shop". I would NOT use the apostrophe s, otherwise. Omitting it is correct. Using it is sloppy.


----------



## Egoexpress

Sorry, do you sometimes omit 's when it'd be needed in streetwise speaking or it'd be unnatural?


----------



## bibliolept

I don't think many people would omit the possessive in these cases in everyday speech: it hardly saves one much effort in most cases.

Can you cite a specific example of this phenomenon?


----------



## pepperfire

It strikes me as being unnatural to have it.


----------



## Egoexpress

Actually I've got no specific example, it came to mind when we were talking about shopping and stuff, and I caught myself sometimes saying it and sometimes not and I was wondering why it was so.


----------



## pepperfire

We struck up a conversation here in my kitchen... hubby says butcher's, daughter says butcher... none of us say petrol station's.

It may be a verbal comfort depending on where one is raised.


----------



## Trisia

Wait a second, there.

You can buy a lamb chop at the butcher's, but it sounds more than awkward to say you'll _buy meat at the butcher_ (you might buy it _from the butcher_, but that's another kettle of fish ).

And you can get treated at the doctor's (office), but not really "at the doctor." The doctor does it, but it's _at his place_ you go to. You need the posessive, it's not a habit, it's logical.

Or at least I think it is...


P.S. As bibliolept mentioned, "petrol station" is the name of the place, so you don't need the apostrophe. I agree completely.

I went and bought some gum over at the petrol station.
I went and bought five gallons over at Jim*'s* place.


----------



## bibliolept

True enough: you go see a doctor, but you go to the doctor's (office).


----------



## WestSideGal

In AE it is extremely common to leave out the possesive -s in SPOKEN language, as per Trisia's examples.  To the ear it is not at all unusual.  In *written language it is absolutely incorrect to leave out the possesive -s!* 

There is quite a difference between what is acceptable in verbal and written language.


----------



## the_del_star

Yes, in my AE you can go to the doctor, or go to the butcher, or what have you. 

But as soon as you stop thinking of the person, and make it a place with an "at"  it needs the 's in oral conversation, I've never heard it otherwise.


----------



## HistofEng

I agree with WestSideGirl too.  But I would never substitute "I'm going to Sara tomorrow" for "I'm going to Sara*'s* tomorrow."


----------



## Forero

When I was young, we called the grocery store Freddy's, the butcher shop Gordon's, and the variety (toy and gift) store Buddy's because the grocer's name was Freddy, the butcher's name was Gordon, and the variety store owner's nickname was Buddy.

We used to go to Woolworth's about once a month.  The owner's name was F. W. Woolworth, and after his death the Woolworth family continued the business.  In the same tradition, I could go to Walgreen's, but Wal*Mart is just "Walmart".

When I need to go to the doctor, I drive to the doctor's office.  I would not say "doctor office", even generically.

I always say "police station", not "police's station".  I think the issue here is that the police are not just one person and they don't have one single family name.


----------



## Wishfull

Hi.
Thank you all, for your wonderful discussions.
Sorry for interrupting, but I just want to know which is better.
Because I somehow feel butcher's case and dentist's case is a little different, though doctor's case might be the same thing.

_
Mum took me to the *dentist* for a check-up.
Mum took me to the *dentist's *for a check-up._

In this context, I think both fine.

Which is correct or natural?

Thank you.

edit; '*to* the dentist's' and '*at *the dentist's' is difference thing, isn't it?
Should I make another tread?

I think "Mum took me to the dentist" is correct,
and
"I got some treatment at the dentist's" is correct.


----------



## panjandrum

Some years ago I would have been sure we always said "dentist's".
Now, I am sure we say "dentist".

I could rationalise this by saying we used to go to the dentist's (place of work); now we go to (see) the dentist.  I suspect this has nothing to do with the change and it has all to do with the rather hissy sound of -st's at the end of a sentence, if articulated clearly.

I still go to the butcher's.
I go to see the doctor.

Lots more individual responses, I expect


----------



## pepperfire

I'm going to the Dentist. I have an appointment with the Dentist, at the Dentist's (office). I have to agree with panjandrum, that the hissy sound of the -st's might cause you to not wish to articulate the possessive. 

I wouldn't use the apostrophe s possessive unless I were meaning it to be the Dentist's office without using the word office. Referring to the doctor himself, though; no apostrophe s.

I must take the sentence "I got some treatment at the dentist's" to task, since one gets treatments "from" the dentist. Although, one might say, "I got my teeth cleaned AT the Dentist's but again, it's a question of which you are referring to, the doctor himself or the place.

I would say "I AM at the Dentist's" or I will be at the Dentist's later".

Always, though with the possessive replacing the "office".

That's MY individual response.


----------



## Hermione Golightly

We always use the 's  when we mean the place of work or home of someone especially after prepositions like 'at' or 'to', except for those instances when we might be focusing on their profession or trade itself, rather than their work place, business premises or home. 

We can't see why there should be a problem with the 's' in dentist followed by possessive 's. It isn't at all like names ending in  's' such as Thomas or James. We often go to the doctor's without seeing a doctor perhaps to see the nurse or to pick up a prescription or discuss paperwork with the secretary or practice manager.
 But we don't often go to the dentist's without seeing a dentist.

If I  were seeing several specialists in the same premises, a hospital for example, I'd refer to the department: radiology, rather than 'the radiologist's or the radiologist.

"Shall I go to the doctor or the dentist?" The focus is on the profession, not the place.


By the way, stationery is what the stationer sells. "I'm going to the stationer's", not "to the stationery's"


Hermie


----------



## Myridon

Hermione Golightly said:


> But we don't often go to the dentist's without seeing a dentist.


In the US, many dental practices use "dental hygienists" to clean your teeth, take the x-rays, etc. so you may not see the dentist unless there is a problem.  I've had my teeth cleaned at the dentist's when the dentist was out of the country.


----------



## inib

I'm coming back to this old thread because a new question has arisen on the Spanish-English forum and I would like to hear your opinions.
I'm starting from the point of view that the apostrophe IS necessary if we are referring to the place where the dentist, chemist, doctor, butcher, grocer etc works. 
If we are talking about an establishment in which we preconceive that there are several people working, that several different people may actually participate in the service they offer me, or even that there is more than one owner, would you consider putting the apostrophe after the "s"?
Examples
_I had these posters done at the printers'
They ruined my wedding dress at the dry cleaners'
_Thank you for your comments.


----------



## Hermione Golightly

> that there are several people working, that several different people may  actually participate in the service they offer me, or even that there  is more than one owner, would you consider putting the apostrophe after  the "s"?



I wouldn't and I have never seen it done. I suppose it is a relic of older times and like many aspects of English not very logical. The only change I'd like to see is abandoning possessive apostrophes. They are more trouble than they are worth. I was reflecting yesterday that nowadays I more often see them incorrectly used than correctly. I feel a terrific rant coming on ....  .

Hermione


----------



## inib

Thanks for your opinion, and grit your teeth - I think you may well be in for an earful!


----------



## Loob

inib said:


> I'm starting from the point of view that the apostrophe IS necessary if we are referring to the place where the dentist, chemist, doctor, butcher, grocer etc works.
> If we are talking about an establishment in which we preconceive that there are several people working, that several different people may actually participate in the service they offer me, or even that there is more than one owner, would you consider putting the apostrophe after the "s"?


Hi inib

No, I wouldn't use *s'*.

In practice, I think I would deal with your two examples in different ways:
_I had these posters done at the printer*'s*
__They ruined my wedding dress at the dry cleaner*s* (no apostrophe)_


----------



## Chasint

inib said:


> I'm coming back to this old thread because a new question has arisen on the Spanish-English forum and I would like to hear your opinions.
> I'm starting from the point of view that the apostrophe IS necessary if we are referring to the place where the dentist, chemist, doctor, butcher, grocer etc works.
> If we are talking about an establishment in which we preconceive that there are several people working, that several different people may actually participate in the service they offer me, or even that there is more than one owner, would you consider putting the apostrophe after the "s"?
> Examples
> _I had these posters done at the printers'
> They ruined my wedding dress at the dry cleaners'
> _Thank you for your comments.


Yes I would consider it. It makes absolute sense to me. However there may be a subjective aspect.

1. The listener and speaker both know the office in question and both know that it is run by more than one person.
_Wife: I'm going to the doctors' tomorrow afternoon.
Husband: Okay I'll pick up the children._

2. Only the speaker knows the details
_Mary: Good morning Mrs. Muggins, I haven't time to chat today, I'm on the way to the doctor's.

_It seems only right to me that we use the normal rules of grammar to decide. What's the big deal?


----------



## Hermione Golightly

> _I had these posters done at the printers'
> They ruined my wedding dress at the dry cleaners'_



Hi Loob



> In practice, I think I would deal with your two examples in different ways:
> _I had these posters done at the printer*'s*
> __They ruined my wedding dress at the dry cleaner*s* (no apostrophe)_



What's the thinking behind not using an apostrophe at all in '... at the dry cleaners'? I do think it's a somewhat unnatural sentence, but as an example sentence I can't see the difference.  I suppose I might have to think twice about using the apostrophe in a sentence like  "The dry cleaners/dry cleaner's on the High Street have/has a special offer this week", but I'm thinking of the shop, not thinking of them as people. Perhaps in "The dry cleaners ruined my wedding dress" I would be thinking of the people working there, but I haven't managed to convince myself of that.

Hermione


----------



## Hermione Golightly

I say I'm going _to the doctor's_ even when I'm going to get a flu jab from the practice nurse or blood taken by the phlebotomist, or to the _dentist's _when I'm only seeing the hygenist, because my aim is to say where I am going: place, not person or purpose.

Hermione


----------



## Chasint

Hermione Golightly said:


> I say I'm going _to the doctor's_ even when I'm going to get a flu jab from the practice nurse or blood taken by the phlebotomist, or to the _dentist's _when I'm only seeing the hygenist, because my aim is to say where I am going: place, not person or purpose.
> 
> Hermione


Yes. Surely "doctor's" is simply an abbreviation of "doctor's surgery"? It is for me even if I'm simply picking up a prescription.

I might even say "I'm going to the doctor's (or doctors') to clean the windows."

Why do we have to invent a whole new set of rules when this is already covered by standard grammar?


----------



## ewie

inib said:


> _I had these posters done at the printers'
> They ruined my wedding dress at the dry cleaners'
> _


'Course, it makes no difference at all how you spell it in speech:
printer's /ˈprɪntə(r)z/
printers /ˈprɪntə(r)z/
printers' /ˈprɪntə(r)z/

I don't think I'd ever write _printers'_ ~ it seems so (erm) finicky.  But I might consider using the simple _printers_, especially if it was being post-modified:
_I had these posters done at *the printers on Standish Street
*
_ I'd then go on to give that a plural verb:
_The printers on Standish Street *are* the best in town
_
All that seems quite unremarkable to me


----------



## Chasint

The thing that confuses me about this whole discussion is why anyone thinks there is a problem! 

I go to the doctor's (surgery) to see the doctor. I go to the doctor for a diagnosis. If there are several doctors I go to the doctors' (surgery).

1. I am going to the doctor today. (I want her to renew my prescription)
2. I am going to the doctor's today. (He wants me to mend his letterbox)
3. I am going to the doctors' (surgery) today. (They want to subject me to a joint examination. One will hold me down while the other one prods me with a stethoscope)
4. I am going to the doctors today. They will scold me for wasting their time.

We have perfectly good rules of grammar to cover all this, why make an exception for shops and offices?


----------



## Loob

Hermione Golightly said:


> What's the thinking behind not using an apostrophe at all in '... at the dry cleaners'? I do think it's a somewhat unnatural sentence, but as an example sentence I can't see the difference.  I suppose I might have to think twice about using the apostrophe in a sentence like  "The dry cleaners/dry cleaner's on the High Street have/has a special offer this week", but I'm thinking of the shop, not thinking of them as people. Perhaps in "The dry cleaners ruined my wedding dress" I would be thinking of the people working there, but I haven't managed to convince myself of that.


I think you've hit the nail on the head, Hermione.  The answer, for me, is that I don't see "the dry cleaners" in personal terms - I don't see it as "the shop owned by Mr Smith the dry cleaner".  I could happily say "I walked into the shop and said hello to the butcher", but I'd be unlikely to say "I walked into the shop and said hello to the dry cleaner".

Reflecting on ewie's post 28, I've realised that I find _at the printer*s*_ _(no apostrophe)_ unremarkable too.  I might, today, walk into my local _printer*'s*_; but if I worked for a large commercial organisation, I'd probably send stuff off to the _printer*s*_.


----------



## inib

Many thanks for all your replies. My own thinking coincides pretty well with Biffo's, but I can see that we are not a majority.
I realise that the apostrophe may not be necessary when we use the preposition "to", because you can go/take something to a place or to a person (or to several people), but when we use "at", it's clearly a place.
The original question on the Spanish-English forum just asked which was the correct spelling - _dry cleaners_ or _dry cleaner's _- with no context at all. As we had no idea of whether we were talking about a place or one person or more, we all started making wild guesses


----------



## Loob

I know that your post was intended to draw this part of the thread to a stop, inib - or at least a pause.

But I would like to add that I think the possessive apostrophe is on its way out.  It was always rather a strange beast, and there are lots of current examples of its elimination: the former _Lloyd's Bank_ is now _Lloyds Bank_, for instance.

Like Hermione, I wish we could just get rid of it.  I rather suspect that in 100 years or so, we *will* have.


----------



## ewie

Yes, I'm pretty sure it's doomed.
I often find myself dithering over whether to put it on or leave it off; increasingly often including it looks (to me) fussy and pedantic.


----------



## inib

Well, I thought that Hermione was going to get a telling-off from the erudites! Yesterday I thought of all sorts of examples that would be ambiguous without the apostrophe, but I must admit that then I realised that you can't *hear* an apostrophe and we all get on fine in speech.


----------



## MikeLynn

However, you can hear different emphasis, phrasing, rhythm and intonation, let alone the gestures or the expression of the speaker's face. Speaking of written language, all of these are impossible and then, I believe, the apostrophe might be quite helpful. 
M&L


----------



## Loob

MikeLynn said:


> However, you can hear different emphasis, phrasing, rhythm and intonation, let alone the gestures or the expression of the speaker's face. Speaking of written language, all of these are impossible and then, I believe, the apostrophe might be quite helpful.
> M&L


Well, personally, M&L, I can't think of any example where the possessive apostrophe is helpful - in other words, I can't think of any example where its omission* would lead to confusion.

That said, if you can think of one, I'd be delighted!

------------
*in an ideal world.  I recognise that we have to use it now - though I still think it's dying....


----------



## MikeLynn

Well, I really love Lynne Truss's example of _"Giant Kid's Playground"_ which logically must have scared a lot of people off, I sure could more include more quotes from _Eats, Shoots and Leaves_, but I don't want to waste our time here. Then there are all those funny non-native attempts like "Punk is Kid's" and the like that usually make very little sense if any. The only thing I'm trying to say is that it, the apostrophe, does exist and sometimes it makes some things clearer and a bit easier to understand  M&L


----------



## rino delbello

<Added to this thread. Nat>
Hi All

I have read in the book ' Practical English Usage ' by MIchael Swan that when someone goes to a place to buy things or doing something else, e.g. butcher, baker, doctor, etc. the use of the possessive with 's is now old-fashioned. For example, I will say ' I go to the doctor' instead of the doctor's or ' I will buy some apples at the greengrocer ' instead of the greengrocer's so on. Do you agree with this nowadays' habit's rule or not?


----------



## lingobingo

In my (British) experience, the apostrophe version is still the norm when referring to the _place_ in question, e.g. I’m going to the doctor’s, fishmonger’s, hairdresser’s, etc.


----------



## rino delbello

Oh... so I will need to use the 's when referring to common usage, thank you a lot lingobingo


----------



## lingobingo

Well, others may disagree, of course. There’s no rule about this.


----------



## entangledbank

When you go to the doctor you often go to a specific person, namely your registered doctor. But you might still go to the doctor's to make an appointment. At the greengrocer's, the individual who serves you is usually not important. I would agree that it's still normal to use -_'s_ for the place or establishment.


----------



## rino delbello

OK, thanks a lot entanglebank , so it depends on the way of referring to a specific doctor or a doctor in general, doesn't it?


----------



## natkretep

It's possibly about emphasis. Are you thinking about the place, or the specific doctor? I can imagine a sentence like 'I saw my friend at the doctor's' in the same way we might say _the hairdresser's _or _the drycleaner's_.


----------



## rino delbello

Hi natkretep, I am thinking about the place, so in this case always with 's, right?


----------



## natkretep

I'm a little bit wary of saying 'always', but, yes, if I'm focussing on the place, I would tend to use the possessive form.


----------



## rino delbello

OK, thanks a lot


----------



## rino delbello

Hi again, what happens if I am referring to go to somewhere to buy something? Is mostly of common usage the form with 's or without 's?


----------



## entangledbank

Buy what? It makes a difference. Think of what life was like a hundred years ago. There was a man (it was always a man then) who was your doctor - Dr Collins, perhaps. And a man (Alfred, perhaps) was your butcher, and others were your greengrocer or baker. They had shops and assistants, but it was Alfred's shop, or Dr Collins's surgery. An assistant might help you, or his wife or son might, but you thought of it as your butcher's (shop). These traditional occupations still use _-'s_. But newer things like printers don't come from the days when you bought things from your printer, Joseph. So we don't use it for every shop, only the traditional kinds.


----------



## lingobingo

As eb says, with traditional shops, you’d tend to use the apostrophe-s because (in the same way as you’d say I’m going round to my friend’s, my grandma’s, etc.) you mean a place belonging to a person – that tradesman’s premises:

I’m going to the grocer’s, chemist’s, tobacconist’s, greengrocer’s, shoemender’s, hairdresser’s …​
Otherwise, in the case of a shop/store rather than a medical practitioner of some kind, you’d use whatever the normal term is for that establishment:
​I’m going to the shoe shop, the bike shop, the computer store, the dry cleaners, the pharmacy …​


----------



## Forero

lingobingo said:


> ... I’m going to the shoe shop, the bike shop, the computer store, the dry cleaners, the pharmacy …


I would have said _the dry cleaners'_, with an apostrophe, and put it in the list with _the grocer's_.


----------



## lingobingo

Yes, fine. I would do either. I just don’t see dry cleaners as quite so “traditional” as people like a butcher, baker, greengrocer, etc!


----------



## rino delbello

OK, thank a lot both of you for clearing this doubt of mine


----------

