Talk:-'s

Phonetic difference

I wonder if there is a phonetic difference between calves [kɑːvz] and calf's [kɑːfs]? Or is the latter pronounced [kɑːvz] as well? Maybe this should also be added to the lemma. But anyway, thanks in advance!

Calf's ends in s, not z, as predicted by the rules at the top of the entry. No need to add anything. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:33, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Okay then. Well, yeah. It is predicted by the rules, but it's still a special case in which plural and possessive form are different. So non-native speakers may be in doubt about this (at least I was). It might be helpful to add it, but there's "need" for it. So you're right about that. Thanks again for helping!

No, they aren't different. "Calf's" means "belonging to a single calf". "Calves'" means "belonging to more than one calf". Compare house, house's, houses, houses'. This is the standard rule. Equinox ◑ 18:23, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

They are different. "House" is just another example of the same thing. In a word with a regular S-plural all three forms sound the same: girl's, girls, girls' -> no audible difference. In plurals that change the final sound of the stem, this change is not done in the singular possessive and hence there is an audible distinction between calf's vs. calves, calves' / house's vs. houses, houses'. ---- What I wasn't sure about was that maybe this change of the final sound was also done in the singular possessive, which caused me to ask the above question. Again: I'm not saying this is contrary to rules given in the lemma. The rules are fine. It's just something that is a bit special (i.e. different from the situation in regular plurals).

You asked about this at the talk page for the ending, which implied that you were inquiring about some trait of the ending. It has nothing to do with the ending, but everything to do with the voicing of the sound that comes before it: your example of girls is meaningless because l can never be unvoiced in English, so it will always cause a following s to be voiced. Likewise, house adds a vowel to separate it from the following s, so the voicing alternation at the end of the stem has no effect on the final s- it's always voiced because of the vowel. There's no vowel between the stem and the ending in calf or calves, so the stem-final consonant controls the voicing of the final s, and this consonant happens to alternate in voicing. In Old English, f could be either voiced or voiceless, but modern English uses v for what used to be the voiced f (borrowed from French). Checking the spelling won't work for th, though- path's (both possessive and contraction) are voiceless, but paths is voiced. When the stem-final th doesn't alternate, as in the case of myth, then the final s doesn't alternate, either. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:16, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Please try to understand me instead of trying to prove me wrong... I've asked specifically about the pronunciation of calf's. Specifically this form. And I've never claimed that there is an irregularity in the ending! I haven't and I won't. --- All I asked was if calf's is pronounced different from calves. Being a non-native speaker I didn't know. I considered it possible that calf's might be pronounced [kɑːvz] just like calves. I thank you again for helping me out. --- Now, my example with "girls" is anything but meaningless, it is my very point! My point is the audible distinction between singular possessive and plural. This distinction does not exist in words with a regular plural (girl's = girls), but it does exist in words with a voiced final sound in the plural (calf's =/= calves). This bit, I thought, might be worth adding to the lemma. Now, I'm very fine with you not adding it, I've just proposed it. Best regards!

"4. (nonstandard) are" needs more explanation

This fourth definition needs some kind of note on it, because it isn't simply just a contraction of "are"; it can only be used in certain constructions.

To illustrate, "Where's the children?" and "There's the children." are well-formed sentences, but "The children's here." is ungrammatical.

are

there's reads "Contraction of there are", so should it be mentioned here?

Secondly, in the phrase many's the + plural noun, is many's also a contraction of many are ? --Backinstadiums (talk) 08:29, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

It's a contraction of is, not are. Any claims to the contrary should be corrected. Are contains no letter s. Equinox ◑ 10:18, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

plural possessives: "cows' milk"

Garner's fourth edition, page 712, offers the following corrections

Writers sometimes confound the singular and plural possessives, most commonly by misusing the singular for the plural:
• “ the poor used to keep asses as beasts for their milk, which is more nutritious and closer to human milk than cow’s [read cows’] milk is; in the 1750s, some London shops sold ass’s [read asses’] milk, usually under the sign ‘Ass and Foal.’"

I do not get what meanings the author is trying to contrast regarding the apostrophe, and the idiomatic expession that Wiktionary offers is cow's milk, as well as cow milk, so a bit of elaboration on it would really help. --Backinstadiums (talk) 16:35, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Discussions regarding hyphens

Other talk pages where discussions can be found especially once two ongoing RFC and RFD threads are archived regarding whether or not things similar to this should include hyphens are Talk:-'re/Talk:'re and Talk:-'ve/Talk:'ve; other related entries include -'m/'m, -'s/'s, -'ll/'ll; see also -', '. - -sche (discuss) 09:24, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

RFC discussion: July 2016–December 2019

See Talk:'ve#RFC discussion: July 2016–December 2019.

​butcher’s (plural butchers)

The plural of butcher's, newsagent's etc. looses the apostrophe, according to the OED --Backinstadiums (talk) 16:28, 3 February 2020 (UTC) ​

Proper names ending in a sibilant

With proper names ending in a sibilant, usage varies. Usually, the possessive is pronounced regularly, though the spelling may vary: Jones’(s), /zəz/. Less commonly, the possessive ending is unpronounced (dʒoʊnz) and the corresponding spelling is Jones’. --Backinstadiums (talk) 13:04, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

at

When we refer to being at someone’s house, we can leave out the word house and use at + possessive or at + the definite article + possessive: We stayed overnight at Mike’s. (at Mike’s house) --Backinstadiums (talk) 11:38, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Actually only s ?

<’s> was in drafts of the book for a very long time, with three correspondences: /s/ after voiceless non-sibilant consonants, /z/ after vowels and voiced non-sibilant consonants, and /ɪz/ after sibilant consonants. It was the last of these that originally led me to include <’s>, on the grounds that it seemed a neat way of accounting for the 2-phoneme sequence /ɪz/ in this context; including this correspondence logically meant bringing in the other two. But it seemed neater to consider /ɪz/ as spelt solely by the < s > .

--Backinstadiums (talk) 19:28, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Irregular plurals that phonetically end in [s] or [z]

These pose a little difficulty, don't they? It seems that: (1.) Monosyllables referring to animals like "lice, mice, moose, bass" always take the -’s. (2.) Forms with change from -is [ɪs] to -es [iːz] like "crises, analyses" never do.

• But what about words that end in [iːz] in both singular and plural like "species" or "Chinese"? Is it "species’s" or "species’"?
• And what about the ones where an original plural endings has been transferred to the singular? Is it "barracks’s" or "barracks’"?

90.186.83.177 02:57, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

It is "species'" and "barracks'". The "s's" looks wrong to me. Equinox ◑ 03:06, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

In practice, some people do use barracks's. And for Chinese, which doesn't end in the letter s, I think one has to say Chinese's (Chinese's tones are more numerous than Foobarese's). It's hard to search for any examples of Chinese' but I think it would be considered descriptively nonstandard and prescriptively incorrect. (If there's been any scholarly writing about this, I'd love to see it.) - -sche (discuss) 21:40, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

McDonald's

What's the possessive form of McDonald's? How is it pronounced? --Backinstadiums (talk) 18:31, 4 July 2021 (UTC)