|
|
Post by **** Pulling Himself Off on May 27, 2008 13:11:06 GMT
We are shortens to - We're
They are shortens to - They're
I am shortens to - I'm
I will shortens to - I'll
There are many more - hopefully this helps you to understand the basics though.
If a word already ends in an S then you add the apostrophe onto the end, for example:
Jesus' sandals were proper shit.
Regards
Milk.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2008 13:13:16 GMT
Eats, shoots and leaves?
|
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on May 27, 2008 13:18:19 GMT
Definitely, that's definitely not definately, not to be used with plurals.
As lots of posters, that's posters not poster's, often do.
|
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on May 27, 2008 13:18:48 GMT
For fucks sake?
Is the apostrophe before or after the fuck?
|
|
|
|
Post by Bobthehandsome on May 27, 2008 13:20:16 GMT
after because the sake belongs to the previous word.
|
|
|
|
Post by SegaMegaDave on May 27, 2008 13:21:20 GMT
We are shortens to - We're They are shortens to - They're I am shortens to - I'm I will shortens to - I'll There are many more - hopefully this helps you to understand the basics though. If a word already ends in an S then you add the apostrophe onto the end, for example: Jesus' Sandals Regards Milk. Milk, if Jesus' Sandals is a name then there is no need for an apostrophe. e.g. and so Jesus Sandals said "I am the light of the world" If Jesus' Sandals is a description of an item(s) then there is no need for the capitalisation of the letter S. Unless of course sandals is a brand name such as Jesus' Adidas Predators. Regards SegaMegaDave |
|
|
|
Post by Bobthehandsome on May 27, 2008 13:21:40 GMT
Two signs outside farms where I live.
Log's and stick's for sale'
Beware tractor's turning
Might have big Range Rovers but they don't do apostrophes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2008 13:21:57 GMT
So what's an elf?
|
|
|
|
Post by winger on May 27, 2008 13:24:02 GMT
But its the Sentinal though, isnt it?
|
|
WurstBoy
Youth Player
Please leave your message after the beep. Rebekah will respond later.
Posts: 496
|
Post by WurstBoy on May 27, 2008 13:24:43 GMT
could of is really could have
should of is really should have
would of is really would have
|
|
|
|
Post by Rebelliousjukebox on May 27, 2008 13:25:36 GMT
Two signs outside farms where I live. Log's and stick's for sale' Beware tractor's turning Might have big Range Rovers but they don't do apostrophes. Isn't that misuse of apostrophes often referred to as Grocers' (not Grocer's) apostrophe due to the almost universal trend within that profession to do so? |
|
|
|
Post by taphead on May 27, 2008 13:26:17 GMT
Definitely pre-coital - f**k's sake
|
|
|
|
Post by SegaMegaDave on May 27, 2008 13:26:59 GMT
well your all realy on you're gramatical high horses today are not you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bobthehandsome on May 27, 2008 13:29:38 GMT
Not for one moment Dave (it's 'really' by the way).
|
|
|
|
Post by edinburghstokie on May 27, 2008 13:30:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Bobthehandsome on May 27, 2008 13:31:50 GMT
Thank's  |
|
|
|
Post by powchirper on May 27, 2008 13:32:14 GMT
The one thing that does my head in is when people spell lose with a double o, As in "I hope they loose today"  |
|
|
|
Post by SegaMegaDave on May 27, 2008 13:32:20 GMT
Not for one moment Dave (it's 'really' by the way). i know |
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on May 27, 2008 13:35:58 GMT
Taphead and Handsome yo'ure both wrong
Its' post-coital
|
|
|
|
Post by dexter97 on May 27, 2008 13:39:21 GMT
Isn't that misuse of apostrophes often referred to as Grocers' (not Grocer's) apostrophe due to the almost universal trend within that profession to do so? So grocers tend to be a bit thick then?  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2008 13:43:34 GMT
That's grocerist.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bobthehandsome on May 27, 2008 13:48:28 GMT
It isn't it's Groceris't.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rebelliousjukebox on May 27, 2008 13:48:44 GMT
Nothing against grocers at all. www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2004/jul/08/books.booksnewsFrom that article:- "It was dubbed "the grocer's apostrophe" because of its unnecessary use in plural words on shop signs or placards (Price's Slashed)." (I can see I was wrong in what I said - it is grocer's, not grocers' as I'd said  ) |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2008 13:52:02 GMT
So what's a comma then?
|
|
|
|
Post by Bobthehandsome on May 27, 2008 13:55:54 GMT
No RJ; Grocers' was right because it's plural as in more than one grocer!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Bobthehandsome on May 27, 2008 13:56:27 GMT
What's a hammerfor then?
|
|
|
|
Post by Zippy Moon Dust on May 27, 2008 14:00:11 GMT
The one thing that does my head in is when people spell lose with a double o, As in "I hope they loose today"] That used to wind me up. There's also a trend towards spelling "prove" as "proove" |
|
|
|
Post by Menorca Stokie on May 27, 2008 14:02:23 GMT
That John the Baptist was a shady character.
He must be to blame, shirly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zippy Moon Dust on May 27, 2008 14:02:49 GMT
Isn't that misuse of apostrophes often referred to as Grocers' (not Grocer's) apostrophe due to the almost universal trend within that profession to do so? So grocers tend to be a bit thick then? Oi!!! A few years ago I was a self employed grocer. |
|
|
|
Post by Menorca Stokie on May 27, 2008 14:05:56 GMT
Alright me old fruit, keep yer hair on.
Let tuce carry this on for a bit longer.
|
|
)
