You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Every internet search gives a different answer!
I want to personalise a Swiss Army knife for my god son. His name is Will
Is it.....
a. Will's Knife
or
b. Wills' Knife
I barely scraped a pass in 'O' level English, and that was 41 years ago.
TIA wf
Will's
(We should abolish the apostrophe.)
Will’s knife.
Although I predict 5 pages, a ban and an stw flounce.
chatGPT: The correct option would be "a. Will’s Knife." It indicates possession by a single person, in this case, your godson Will.
I like how chatgpt slightly passive aggressively corrected your “god son” to “godson”. I simply pasted your post into it.
a)
but I agree with johnx2, apostrophes cause more confusion than clarification so we should get rid of them.
Nah. Correct use of the apostrophe is the different between knowing your shit and knowing you're shit...
c) Will's knife?
Just change the text to "This knife belongs to Will" 🤣
a
a
Small k as well
a
but I agree with johnx2, apostrophes cause more confusion than clarification so we should get rid of them.
You would have to get rid of contractions too:
Your round/ you're round
Etc.
a
But I would just engrave it with:
Will
It seems a bit strange to have the item/noun also included in the engraving.
Do his parents write "Will's shorts", "Will's t-shirt", "Will's left sock" and "Will's right sock" in his P.E. kit?
Welsh "cyllell ewyllys". Maybe 🤔
The Welsh language gets my vote if apostrophes aren't used👍
a. Will's knife.
I'm finding that the French have an uneasy relationship with the apostrophe. Because French doesn't have Will's knife, it has the knife of will, it doesn't really know what to do with apostrophes, so you end up with all manner of grocer's apostrophes. Ironically, I just had to look up whether it was grocers' or grocer's... The internet seems to think that it's the apostrophe of just one grocer, though that seems wrong. Unless grocerkind is being treated as a giant, vegetable-selling entity...
I want to personalise a Swiss Army knife for my god son. His name is Will
Is it…..
a. Will’s Knife
or
b. Wills’ Knife
Doesn't it depend how posh the godson is?
'This is Will's knife. There are many like it, but this one is Will's.'
Quite small.
c) Will’s knife?
Agreed, the knife belongs to a singular Will and a knife is a noun, not a proper noun.
Will’s knife
Edit, although, does the belonging make it a proper noun? (Ie, it’s a river, but it’s a River Thames). So it’s a knife, but it’s a knife that belongs to Will so it’s Will’s Knife? Probably wrong but can’t decide!
I understand the point Pyro, but 'knowing your shit' and 'knowing youre shit' still works if we lose the apostrophe.
Maybe now that AI can check everything it will all work out.
Nah. Correct use of the apostrophe is the different between knowing your shit and knowing you’re shit…<br /><br />
Damn right!
Just be thankful that it’s not in Navaho…
The apostrophe here denotes possession. So "Will's knife" is the knife belonging to Will. "Wills' knife" is the knife belonging to Wills. How many godsons named Will do you have? 😁
I'm with peekay here though. Is it necessary to have "knife," is anyone going to pick it up and wonder "what is this strange device?" How about "Will 2023" or some such?
(It's a bad present anyway, people always say "fire at Will" and he'll be bringing a knife to a gun fight... )
Not sure why you need to have 'knife' on it, kind of obvious what it is. So it would then just be a simple WILL, as nothing else, no apostrophes etc needed.
Will is his name, identifying the owner of said knife.
I got my nephews the Swiss mini champ for their 16th's. Small enough to go on the keyring, but loaded with enough gadgets of the right size to not be illegal and do what they're needed for.
I may be wrong but I think all SAKs are legal carry in the UK?
I used to carry a knife as a teenager, it was less 'thug' and more that my grandad carried one and hero worship. It was a large-ish lock knife which lived in the inside pocket of my denim jacket. I'd probably be looking at jail time today.
Go with "Will knife" just to keep his intentions ambiguous.
Some fun suggestions here. And it would be “Will’s knife”. But, as has been said, it is obvious it is a knife. Perhaps for some amusing courtroom disambiguation you could have it engraved “Will’s teacup”? Though the mangling of some of the chat text could offer “God’s son 2023”?
Also, if it ends up stuck somewhere inappropriate by someone else would it be better to have it marked “Not Will’s knife, nope, never seen it before officer”?
Naef blong Will
I wish to ****ing god people would stop using chatgpt as a source. All sorts of news media and social networks are plagued with bots and on a forum where we reliably have actually humans conversing it really grates to have bots by proxy in more and more threads.
Anyway..... Knives are so noughties. Its 'Will's EDC' obvs.
The "k" needs to be capitalised as it is a real noun when combined with "Swiss Army"...
Those who need to be ready for anything take one of these with them everywhere. Since 1897, the Swiss Army Knife has been a trusted tool of adventurers around the world. Whether you’re exploring the city, the ocean, the mountains or even space, the Swiss Army Knife is the companion you can count on.
I understand the point Pyro, but ‘knowing your shit’ and ‘knowing youre shit’ still works if we lose the apostrophe.
How about "well shit" and "we'll shit"?
Surely it should have its own name?
Glamdring, Gurthang, Kusanagi-no-Tsurugi that sort of thing?
Just remember the apostrophe indicates that letters have been missed out. Originally the phrase would have been ‘Will his knife’.
H’T’H’
oops..wrong image...
William’s fake spear
Wullie’s chib
Correct use of the apostrophe is the different between knowing your shit and knowing you’re shit…
Indeed, and correct use of capitals is the different(sic) between helping your Uncle Jack off a horse and helping your uncle jack off a horse.
Correct use of the apostrophe is the different between knowing your shit and knowing you’re shit…
Do you really need an apostrophe to know this 🤔😁
How about “well shit” and “we’ll shit”?
lol. Sometimes you need context. Maybe the Who did live in Leeds? I guess I could have proposed simply losing the apostrophe to denote possession. That's unarguable. But yeah let's lose it altogether.
The way it was explained to me was what you are actually doing is shortening the phase "Will his knife". The apostrophe replaces the missing letters ("hi")
The way it was explained to me was what you are actually doing is shortening the phase “Will his knife”. The apostrophe replaces the missing letters (“hi”)
How does that work for the plural version? As in: the brothers' knives...
The way it was explained to me was what you are actually doing is shortening the phase “Will his knife”. The apostrophe replaces the missing letters (“hi”)
Will his knife what?
I guess I could have proposed simply losing the apostrophe to denote possession. That’s unarguable.
Maybe to you. I think they aid clarity via some simple rules, that anyone could learn.
really? The OP, for instance, communicates expertly in written English, I'd say, but isn't confident about use of apostrophes hence the thread. I'm sure he could easily learn - but I can't honestly see what this would improve how he communicates.
I’m sure he could easily learn – but I can’t honestly see what this would improve how he communicates.
It would indicate possession or a contraction. I suspect there's a whole generation of us who weren't taught these rules properly at school.
The OP wouldn't've (2 apostrophes!) started this thread if they didn't want to know.
English uses apostrophes for two completely different functions (omission/contraction and possession) and the terminal -s similarly (plurals and...possession). No wonder it's confusing.
English uses apostrophes for two completely different functions
Shits'n'giggle's
The OP wouldn’t’ve (2 apostrophes!) started this thread if they didn’t want to know
He wanted to know in order for an engraving to be correct according to the pointless rules, not for clarity of communication.
It would indicate possession or a contraction. I suspect there’s a whole generation of us who weren’t taught these rules properly at school.
I'm well aware of the rules. I'm saying they don't help communication and are redundant for all purposes other than pedantry.
I’m saying they don’t help communication and are redundant for all purposes other than pedantry.
They aid communication by indicating possession and contraction.
really? The OP, for instance, communicates expertly in written English, I’d say, but isn’t confident about use of apostrophes hence the thread. I’m sure he could easily learn – but I can’t honestly see what this would improve how he communicates.
Maybe he could help with your Shatner Commas.
Will his knife what?
Will, his knife.
Language evolves, this is older English. I understand your point but it's not really appropriate here.
I think they aid clarity via some simple rules
When in doubt, this really is the rule of thumb. The point of language is effective and efficient communication. It's perfectly cromulent to slap an apostrophe in if it improves clarity.
I wish I had a better example because this one is terrible but compare TVs vs tv's. Writing tvs would be confusing.
what you are actually doing is shortening the phase “Will his knife”. The apostrophe replaces the missing letters (“hi”)
really - where does this belief come from?
I suspect we use s at the end of a possessive word from old English. Before the Normans invaded and brought in a lot of French words and grammar English was very similar to German, from which it was descended. Even now written German uses s or es to show possession, like “Das Haus des Mannes” to mean “the house of the man”.
Later the apostrophe was used when people tried to standardise the language, partly to indicate the missing e where es had been used (lambes became lamb’s) and partly to distinguish lambs plural from lamb’s possessive.
It is nothing to do with replacing “his” - otherwise we would all be saying “Alice’r knife” to replace “her”.
Confusion about using apostrophes for possession and abbreviation I can kinda get (and especially the it's/its thing). What winds me up is when people use them for plurals, as that is always, always wrong.
(Awaits example where it's not)
What winds me up is when people use them for plurals, as that is always, always wrong.
(Awaits example where it’s not)
Greengrocer's? 😁
It may be wrong but I think it sometimes aids readability in examples like Cougar's "tv's" above.
TVs looks weird. TV's also looks weird, and I'm sure it's wrong, but somehow looks righter.
Actually now that I've written it out, it looks wrong. Bugger. What was my point again?
Greengrocer’s? 😁
Exactly - apostrophes are classy so more apostrophes must be more classy. Look at our juicy plum's and peach's... who can resist? No. Ban these and ban the rest.
The point of language is effective and efficient communication. It’s perfectly cromulent to slap an apostrophe in if it improves clarity.
I wish I had a better example because this one is terrible but compare TVs vs tv’s. Writing tvs would be confusing.
^^Hard to say really what that's intended to communicate? The pointlessness of commas maybe? I'll have another go...
compare TVs vs tv’s. Writing tvs would be confusing.
Eh? Nah, anyway, now we've sorted this one, can we move on to that bugbear of Therese Coffey, the Oxford comma? May not take that long on reflection given who opposes it...
really – where does this belief come from?
That's an interesting question. I've always believed it to be the case but I don't know why.
TVs looks weird. TV’s also looks weird, and I’m sure it’s wrong, but somehow looks righter.
Really, with stuff like this the answer is to restructure the sentence. Writing "televisions" fixes the issue (I said it was a bad example).
can we move on to that bugbear of Therese Coffey, the Oxford comma?
This is the same answer. The canonical example is saying you have three sets of guests, "We invited the rhinoceri, Washington and Lincoln," arguing that the Oxford comma makes it "We invited the rhinoceri, Washington, and Lincoln." But if we rearrange the sentence to become "We invited Washington, Lincoln and the rhinoceri" then the problem goes away.
(Personally I take more of an issue with "rhinoceri" here, it's a hypercorrection like pluralising octopus as octopi.)
WILL MEC HEHT GEWYRCAN
The Oxford comma makes things clearer. I really don't know why anyone would not prefer it.
For example: I like whiskey, beer and gin and tonic.
Versus: I like whiskey, beer, and gin and tonic.
And: I like whiskey, beer and gin, and tonic.
Will, his knife.
Language evolves, this is older English. I understand your point but it’s not really appropriate here.
I know I was highlighting the irony of talking about correct use of an apostrophe and getting the comma wrong.
I don't give a shit about apostrophe because you generally have to try really hard to not understand what was meant.
The Oxford comma makes things clearer. I really don’t know why anyone would not prefer it.
For example: I like whiskey, beer and gin and tonic.
Versus: I like whiskey, beer, and gin and tonic.
And: I like whiskey, beer and gin, and tonic.
..and finally, a real life instance you'd not want to get wrong, at risk of ending up with a tonic!
I am also a fan of the Oxford comma.
I don’t give a shit about apostrophe because you generally have to try really hard to not understand what was meant.
Yeah. In social media stuff, emails from friends, who cares? In formal documents, you'd expect the author to understand apostrophes.
So what have I learnt from all this so far.
Well Will's getting a knife for his birthday it's clear. It'll be engraved with "Will's knife" on its side. Hopefully he'll be happy with its functionality and it's all he ever needs from a knife.
Let's not talk about his brothers' knives. (Now does he have one brother with several knives or more than one brother with a knife each?) 😉
Multiple brothers. The number of knives belonging to each is unspecified.
For example:
For example: I like whiskey, beer and gin and tonic.
Versus: I like whiskey, beer, and gin and tonic.
And: I like whiskey, beer and gin, and tonic.
This is the rhinoceri again. "I like gin and tonic, whiskey and beer." Or even, "I like whiskey, beer and gin & tonic."
Though really when you've got a list of multi-word items, that's what semicolons are for. "I like: whiskey; beer; [and] gin and tonic."
there are times cougs when it’s best just to say well done! 🙂
Oh yeah, I always miss that part. 😁
In social media stuff, emails from friends, who cares? In formal documents, you’d expect the author to understand apostrophes.
Well for a kick off I'd tell someone writing a formal document to write it properly. If you relying on apostrophes you've lost concisivitity and you've ****ed it.
A. You shouldn't be using contractions in a formal document, end of.
B. You shouldn't be relying on the possessive either there, as cougar has pointed out, is always a better more concise way to write it
C. There are enough problems with the concept of the apostrophe and enough people with dyslexia and other learning difficulties it would fail the accessibility requirements we should all strive for in technical documents.
I was taught to flip the phrase into the long form with 'of' to check the apostrophe placement. Remove the apostrophe and any s after it then place after the object word with 'of' inbetween.
So
Will's Knife = Knife of Will
Wills' Knife = Knife of Wills