Discussion Forum (Archived)
Guest
HI!
I have a question regarding last names and plurals. I don't think that families need to have an apostrophe when writing on envelopes, yet most everyone includes an apostrophe. Here is an example:
The McFaddens
147 Main St.
Encinitas, CA 92024
OR
The McFadden's
147 Main St
Encinitas, CA 92024
OR
The McFaddens'
147 Main St.
Encinitas, CA 92024
There is more than one family member and it shouldn't be possessive, if it were to be possessive then the apostrophe should come after the s, right?
Wouldn't the same go for a sign in front of a home? The McFaddens or simply McFaddens, however, if we wanted to say The McFaddens' Home it would be possessive.
I am about to order a stamp for envelopes and a sign for a wedding gift that is for John and Chrissy Smith. I want the sign to read Smith est. 2010. However, I don't want to order Smiths if it should be Smith's and McFaddens if it should be McFadden's. As a 4th grade teacher I feel like I know the correct grammar, but I see so many people write last names the other way.
Thank you for your help!
I would think it would be The McFaddens if you are doing mailing addresses. After all, you are saying it is from the family, not the house. If you were doing a house sign, I would make it the McFaddens or McFadden's the McFaddens'. The first would signify this is the family, the second signifying the place of the McFadden family, the third would be the place of the McFaddens.
As an occasional sign painter, I can honestly say that I have seen all three.
I guess the real question is; Is there a style book for life?
I feel awkward going all Emily Post on you, but "The McFaddens" is improper. Sadly, if you do not know what they prefer to be called, you may be out in the dark, since the Emily Post-era is long gone. However, I would suggest a few things, a little Emily-Post-ish. First, if the wife took the husband's name, it is proper to address the correspondence "Mr. and Mrs. McFadden" — actually, it would be most proper, old-school, to use his first name; e.g., "Mr, and Mrs. Isaac McFadden". Second, if the wife has a degree more prominent than the husband, it is actually proper to refer to her first and give a title for the man (we need approval, after all): "Dr. Smith and Mr. McFadden." Third, if the wife did not take the husband's name (as my wife did not), the address would be "Mr. David McFadden and Ms. June Smith." I don't know if that is Emily Post-approved, but it is the constructions I use.
By the way, I also realized your original post asked an important question that will not be settled by what I say, but I shall say it anyway. To paraphrase, offhand, according to the bible that is Strunk & White, the singular is given a possessive with an 's (apostrophe-"s"), hence, if the family name is McFadden, the possessive is McFadden's, for a singular belonging of a McFadden. But if there are more than one McFadden, then McFaddens' is appropriate; however, if the surname were McFaddens, then the appropriate possessive would be McFaddens's. That's what I think, anyway. Any quibbles?
No quibbles with the possessives. But I do have a question. Why would The McFaddens annoy Emily Post? People refer to themselves and others in the plural all he time.
The Simpsons are arguing.
The Hiltons are vacationing in Paris.
I'm Chip Wanamaker of the Philadelphia Wanamakers.
I've also seen the plural and possessive spelled incorrectly nearly as often as I've seen it spelled correctly. When the name in the singular already ends in an S, it is better than even odds that it will be wrong.
Jones
Pl. Joneses
Sing. Poss. Jones's
Plur. Poss. Joneses'
Speaking of apostrophes and plurals, before e-mail, I was never aware how many people, even educated people, think you make the plural of people's names and common nouns with an apostrophe. I have even seen a name ending in an ess sound, like Cox, where an executive secretary added an apostrophe at the end (Cox') because she thought that an apostrophe was somehow needed.
Could the singular possessive of Jones be Jones'?
There are some very exceptional names (Moses, Jesus) that, by some tradition, can form the possessive by adding only an apostrophe. Even in this tradition, these are considered as exceptions to the rule. But I opt out of these exceptions in my writing, even when I am writing for the church, and use Jesus's and Moses's. With either spelling I say jee-zuss-iz and moh-ziz-iz for the possessive.
Glenn is right on, as is always so. I have been told by editors before, however, that the apostrophe-s construction after a last name that already ends with an s looks awkward, and they have often removed such constructions from my pieces (personally, I think their Word program put a red squiggly under it, so they took exception to it). For example, one article said "Mr. Edwards's", which is, in fact, the appropriate form, since the surname is Edwards, but it is jarring at first because our default language position is that nouns ending with s are plural, and thus take only an apostrophe to form the possessive. And, although I have told students otherwise in the past, some people pronounce the possessive of such surnames as though they did not have the possessive s — e.g., "ed-wirdz", not "ed-wirdz-iz". But I still think there is a useful distinction to be made, even in spoken English. After all, I think "Mr. Edwards's (read: ed-wirdz-iz) platform" is more clear than "Mr. Edwards' (read: ed-wirdz) platform."
Oh, and, to respond to your question, Glenn ("Why would The McFaddens annoy Emily Post?"), in the first part of her question the original poster, mikayla, gave examples that appeared to put the question in the context of addressing correspondence, and, hence, my remark that Emily Post would object. Frankly, I'm not that much of a stickler and wouldn't care how one addressed one's envelopes, but Emily Post would suggest the separate titles — such as I posted above — for each member of the couple. Such formalities are likely unnecessary in conversation, and it's certainly easier to call Mr. and Mrs. Isaac McFadden or Dr. Jane McFadden and Mr. Isaac McFadden The McFaddens.
If it were for a sign or a doormat, then I think Phil had it right in his response, and I suppose it depends upon whatever thing the sign or doormat is trying to refer to.
I acknowledge two schools of thought on the 's'-apostrophe question. I was taught that any word ending in '-s' takes its possessive in '-s'-apostrophe, eg "the horses' mood", "the Bridges' house", "Jesus' teaching". But there's a minority view that holds that this applies only when the final '-s' indicates that the word is plural; by that rule, the first example is correct but the last two should be changed to "Bridges's" and "Jesus's". I take it Glenn adheres to that rule. I prefer the one I grew up with, but this is one case where I broadmindedly allow writers to choose their own set of rules.
By the way, I refer to it as a "minority view", but I may be mistaken, and in any case there are plenty of cases where I choose to be in the minority. I didn't mean it as an argument.
Here's a question: When a foreign word is plural and ends in some letter other than 's', how do you form the possessive? How many seraphim's voices can be recorded on the head of a pin? Are cacti's spines poisonous? Ok, maybe the question makes the most sense only when the plural sounds like it ends in 's': If Susie has more than one beau, do her beaux's cars park next to each other, or are her beaux' names listed alphabetically?
Martha Barnette
Grant Barrett
Grant Barrett
1 Guest(s)