# Arkansas House to Argue Over Apostrophes



## Outsider

I found this at the Language Log. 

So, how should the possessive of _Arkansas_ be spelled, English speakers?


----------



## maxiogee

Why is *Arkansan* wrong? 
The 'Arkansas Bureau of Legislative Research' sounds fine to me.


----------



## cuchuflete

Someone asked me whether this thread would be better placed in the English Only forum.  I said it would not.
The spelling of the possessive is a grammar question, certainly.  The attempt to legislate the "right" way is cultural, in my opinion.  The English language, in its various forms, has many conflicting style manuals and even
an 'authoritative' dictionary or two, and its Quirks (both with and without uppercase initials) and Fowlers and Menckens.  It has never had an Academy of the Language to dictate how people should use the language.
Will our first prescriptivist lawgivers be the legislators of Arkansas?


----------



## .   1

This is a very strange discussion.
What is the possessive of New South Wales or The Northern Territory?
Good luck to the state that probably needs a legislation of pronunciation as well.  Arkansas or Arkinsaw.

.,,


----------



## Alxmrphi

I've never ever understood why it is spelt like that, anyone know?


----------



## Outsider

If you mean "Arkansas", see this thread.


----------



## french4beth

Both Arkansas's and Arkansas' are correct; personally, I prefer the second (1 's' at the end) but that 's a stylistic question. You could find plenty of links that will tell you why the 'double s' is correct or why the 'single s' is appropriate.

Seems to me that there are more pressing needs than grammatical questions facing our society these days; sounds like that politician needs to get his priorities straight.


----------



## ayaram7700

A long time ago, I learned that possessive had to be used only with persons. Arkansas is not a person *ergo: *I would say "of Arkansas", or "belonging to Arkansas" and of course, I voted "neither".

A simple opinion.

Bye,

Arayam7700


----------



## .   1

I agree totally with Ayaram.

.,,


----------



## cuchuflete

ayaram7700 said:


> A long time ago, I learned that possessive had to be used only with persons. Arkansas is not a person *ergo: *I would say "of Arkansas", or "belonging to Arkansas" and of course, I voted "neither".
> 
> A simple opinion.
> 
> Bye,
> 
> Arayam7700



Horsefeathers! Or, if you prefer, the horse*'*s feathers. 

Whatever prescriptive taught that must have had a broad description of persons.  How else would
you indicate that the pyjamas belonging to the feline critter were his or hers, if not by using an apostrophe to form the possessive?

The cat's pyjamas!



If the fire truck belongs to the city of Little Rock, Arkansas, would you say

—Little Rocks fire truck?
—The citys fire truck?

Even an Arkansan legislator could do better.


----------



## cuchuflete

A Canadian University web site offers this:



> You can form the possessive case of a singular noun that ends in "s" by adding an apostrophe alone or by adding an apostrophe and "s," as in the following examples:
> The *bus's* seats are very uncomfortable.The *bus'* seats are very uncomfortable.         The film crew accidentally crushed the *platypus's* eggs.The film crew accidentally crushed the *platypus'* eggs.


http://www.arts.uottawa.ca/writcent/hypergrammar/nouns.html#possessive nouns

I suspect that an Arkansas resident would agree with it.


----------



## karuna

ayaram7700 said:


> A long time ago, I learned that possessive had to be used only with persons. Arkansas is not a person *ergo: *I would say "of Arkansas", or "belonging to Arkansas" and of course, I voted "neither".



I am not qualified to vote on this but it is interesting that at school they also taught us that possessive is used only with persons and never with innanimate nouns. When we started to notice that in real life the usage is different, the teachers never gave clear explanation about it. Probably, it is another example of prescriptive versus native. 

I think that the legislators simply want to make a standard style sheet for their state publications. In Latvian we had a situation when the plural of the genitive case of the word _finanses (finances) _had two correct forms, namely, _finanšu _and _finansu_. The Ministry of Finance issued an order that  henceforward only _finanšu _shall be used in all state publications.


----------



## Outsider

karuna said:


> I am not qualified to vote on this but it is interesting that at school they also taught us that possessive is used only with persons and never with innanimate nouns. When we started to notice that in real life the usage is different, the teachers never gave clear explanation about it. Probably, it is another example of prescriptive versus native.


I think it's an example of false rules that foreign teachers sometimes mistakenly deduce or misread about English. I don't think any native speaker would fall for such nonsense.


----------



## winklepicker

Doesn't it depend on the pronunciation? _Arkansaw's_ or _Ar-Kansas'._


----------



## cuchuflete

Outsider said:


> I think it's an example of false rules that foreign teachers sometimes mistakenly deduce or misread about English. I don't think any native speaker would fall for such nonsense.


 I agree with Outsider's analysis.



> The Ministry of Finance issued an order that  henceforward only _finanšu _shall be used in all state publications.


 The Ministr*y's* decision was properly issued.   (Or improperly issued, but it was the Ministry's decision.)


----------



## panjandrum

winklepicker is hinting at my simple-minded solution.
How is it pronounced?
If the possessive s is pronounced, then it gets added to the spelling - Arkansas's. It's just the same as Chris's ball, or Warsaw's canal.

But then I don't suppose the Arkansas legislature goes in for simple-minded solutions.


----------



## emma42

I know it's not exactly the same, but, following the play title, "The Beaux' Strategem" I would go for *Arkansas'.  *


----------



## TRG

Since you are on the subject of Arkansas, a place where I lived for ten years, you might be interested to know that a person from there may be properly referred to as an Arkansawyer. Fortunately, the formation of the possessive for Arkansawyer (singular or plural) is not complicated. Just follow the standard rules. 

As a footnote to all the Arkansas talk, I would also like to note that I lived for a while in a neighboring state to Arkansas, Oklahoma. The state on the northern border of Oklahoma is Kansas. Hmmmmm. Well, in southern Kansas, not far from the place I lived in Oklahoma, there was a town named Arkansas City. Can anyone guess how the locals pronounce it?


----------



## maxiogee

They could, of course, take the easy route out of all this - they could rename the state!


----------



## .   1

maxiogee said:


> they could rename the state!


Ar kan sa ar agree.

Arkansian to denote of or belonging to Arkansas seems more eloquent to me.

.,,


----------



## emma42

Panj may be right - Arkansas's (pronounced Arkansaw's) is logical.


----------



## .   1

I agree.
Arkansasas ssounds ssilly..

..,,,,


----------



## ayaram7700

cuchuflete said:


> Horsefeathers! Or, if you prefer, the horse*'*s feathers.
> 
> Whatever prescriptive taught that must have had a broad description of persons. How else would
> you indicate that the pyjamas belonging to the feline critter were his or hers, if not by using an apostrophe to form the possessive?
> 
> The cat's pyjamas!
> 
> 
> 
> If the fire truck belongs to the city of Little Rock, Arkansas, would you say
> 
> —Little Rocks fire truck?
> —The citys fire truck?
> 
> Even an Arkansan legislator could do better.


 


No need to be so rude..

Yeah, may be, but at least I do not get entangled in bad use possibilities and nobody has ever given me a strange look when trying to use a possessive with a BUS(?) So how come the song goes "The wheels of the bus go round and round..." and not "The bus's wheels?" Strange, ha, anyway, to end my part of the discussion, I'll go on using the possessive mostly with persons and may be with a pet, but I will never say "my bed's sheets or any sh.. like that. The cat's toy, may be OK. But I'll stop right there.


----------



## Outsider

"The razor's edge."

Can such an English phrase be wrong?


----------



## JamesM

karuna said:


> I am not qualified to vote on this but it is interesting that at school they also taught us that possessive is used only with persons and never with innanimate nouns. When we started to notice that in real life the usage is different, the teachers never gave clear explanation about it. Probably, it is another example of prescriptive versus native.


 
This seems like such an odd rule to teach!  We say "There's a scratch on the book's cover" or "the table's legs are uneven."  It would never occur to me to think that possession was only for animate objects.  I wonder where this came from?

As for Arkansas' and Arkansas's, I have no problem with either.  Since the final "s" is not pronounced, "Arkansas's" works better for me than "the Jones's" or "Jesus's".


----------



## cuchuflete

What did Maugham know about English usage, anyway!


----------



## JamesM

cuchuflete said:


> What did Maugham know about English usage, anyway!


 
I'm sorry, I've completely reviewed this thread and couldn't find a reference to Maugham.   Would you enlighten me?


----------



## Outsider

Somerset Maugham, I believe.


----------



## JamesM

Outsider said:


> Somerset Maugham, I believe.


 
Thanks, Outsider.  I was guessing the same thing, but what does that have to do with apostrophes?


----------



## panjabigator

I'd prefer Arkansas' but I really don't have a substantial reason to why I do.  Is there that big of a commotion about it?  (I'm personally more concerned that CVS blatantly has Spanish errors in their drive through....sheesh!)


----------



## cuchuflete

Outsider said:


> "The razor's edge."
> 
> Can such an English phrase be wrong?





JamesM said:


> I'm sorry, I've completely reviewed this thread and couldn't find a reference to Maugham.   Would you enlighten me?



Sorry...just noticed this.

_*The Razor's Edge*_ is a 1944 novel by W. Somerset Maugham. Its epigraph reads, "The sharp edge of a razor is difficult to pass over; thus the wise say the path to Salvation is hard." —Katha-Upanishad.


----------



## ayaram7700

Outsider said:


> "The razor's edge."
> 
> Can such an English phrase be wrong?


 
Hello, may be not wrong, but it would have had the same effect if it had been called "The Razor Edge";  in any and both ways, it is referring to an edge that *belongs* to a razor. Or I am so wrong that I should give up on my entire career because I do not agree with you all, and my whole academic background is botched by a professor who taught me this rule and who -by the way- holds a Master and Doctorate (or  equivalents) in the  English Language which he obtained in a prestigious University somewhere in England? 

Come on, let's accept and do not be so disqualifying.

Thank you,

Ayaram7700


----------



## Outsider

ayaram7700 said:


> Come on, let's accept and do not be so disqualifying.


I don't want to disqualify anyone. I just think that particular rule is either wrong, or a misunderstood exaggeration of some other less stringent rule. There are plenty of examples of the possessive _'s_ being used with non-animate nouns in English. They sound perfectly idiomatic, in some cases more so than alternatives without the _'s_.


----------



## cuchuflete

The Containment Policy's leading advocate—some say its inventor—was a U.S. ambassador and an esteemed professor at Princeton. George F. Kennan had a major influence on the Truman Doctrine and much of U.S. policy during the Cold War.  He recanted, and became a steady and thoughtful critic of U.S. international policies.

How is this relevent to the current topic?   A well-credentialed academic said something.  A bright and attentive student took it to heart.  The professor was badly taught, and passed along a notion that is contrary to abundant empirical evidence.  Prof. Kennan was wise enough to recognize that not all of his initial theory was correct.  I wonder if the professor who would have us apply a Containment Policy to possessive apostrophes has had an opportunity to reconsider.  

This isn't, luckily, the Cold War.  It's a friendly dispute about grammar.  

Here's something from a British newspaper.  It seems rather ordinary, and in no way grammatically incorrect:


> At a university level, we would be wondering how to cement Cambridge and Oxford's place in the global top 10 and how Imperial and University College London could claw their way back into the top 20.


source

Here's another.  There are lots more examples in standard English.



> *Discourse and Division*
> The last main line of reasoning from those who reject democracy's role in development is that significant divisions in developing countries along the lines of race, region, caste, or language suggest that an authoritarian government could be preferable.


 source


----------



## mplsray

winklepicker said:


> Doesn't it depend on the pronunciation? _Arkansaw's_ or _Ar-Kansas'._


 
For me, the pronunciation of _Arkansas_ makes no difference. The state is only pronounced "Arkansaw," while the river can be pronounced like that or like "Ar-Kansas." I would spell the possessive of the "Arkansaw" pronunciation the same way I would spell any other possessive of a word originally from French and having a silent terminal _s:_ _Arkansas/Arkansas's, Dumas/Dumas's._ I would spell the possessive of the "Ar-Kansas" pronunciation the same way I would spell the possessive of any word ending with a sibilant: _Charles/Charles's, Davis/Davis's._ (The only exceptions I would make would be the traditional exceptions, such as _Jesus/Jesus'_ and _Aristophanes/Aristophanes'._)


----------



## karuna

JamesM said:


> This seems like such an odd rule to teach!  We say "There's a scratch on the book's cover" or "the table's legs are uneven."  It would never occur to me to think that possession was only for animate objects.  I wonder where this came from?



I would like to know the origin of these rules myself but your examples would be regarded as incorrect by my old teacher. We argued about it many times. 

Moreover, we learned that for possessives 's' is always added regardless the final letter except in plurals. Maybe my memory is wrong but I recall how we practiced pronouncing "Williams's". I didn't know that if the word ends with pronounced final 's' then possessive 's' is not added.


----------



## .   1

A always try to avoid possessives as indicated by ' because I think that it lacks eloquence.
I consider that it is almost always possible to compose a more eloquent and flowing sentence with no possessive punctuation marks.

.,,


----------



## cuchuflete

That's a valid stylistic preference, but has no bearing on where to put an apostrophe and a potential second "s" with Arkansas. The Arkansas legislature's mucking around with a one word style sheet seems to evoke little cultural discussion.  Where are all the prescriptivists who are always strutting around these forums, declaring that English needs an Academy to tell us how to use our language?

Why are English speakers apparently so firmly indifferent to the topic, preferring to argue the rules and options for creating the possessive of a single word?  Are we just so happy with our anarchic status quo that we can't be bothered trying to take the idea of legislated grammar seriously?


----------



## .   1

I think that too many people have far larger minnow to fry.

.,,


----------



## cuchuflete

The minnow's size,
'tis no surprise,
is in the eyes
of he who fries.


----------

