Q. When forming the possessive for a proper noun rendered with an initialism, should I use ’s, or, because the last word rendered by the initialism is “Services,” should I treat it as a noun plural in form but singular in meaning, and add the apostrophe only? My instinct is to write “FIS's customers” because, plural services or no, FIS is one company. However, on that company's website I see that they form the possessive with the apostrophe only: “FIS' competitive edge.” Thank you for any advice.
A. Your instincts are right: when you are working with initialisms, the trick is to ignore what the letters stand for. In your case, you are no longer talking about Friendly and Ineffectual Services' customers; you're talking about FIS's customers.
Q. I have a sports-related question resulting from a recent conversation with a friend during a baseball game. I maintain that
the proper term for that administrative unit overseeing sports at a college or university should be “Athletics
Department,” but my friend contended that it is “Athletic Department.”
Who’s right?
A. You can spell it either way, but unless your department is particularly buff, “Athletics Department”
makes more sense to me.
Q. I’m trying to find a definitive answer to whether an inanimate object can take the possessive form.
I have been told that an object cannot possess something, so the ’s form should not be used. Instead of “the vehicle’s speed,”
it should be “the speed of the vehicle.” I understand the rule, but can’t
find anything here to support it.
A. We seem to be having a run on questions that turn on the issue of literal word usage. But let’s think
about it. If a table can’t “have” legs, where does this
leave us? True, the table is probably not conscious that it possesses legs, but then does that mean it doesn’t
truly possess them? If a table possesses legs in the forest, where there’s no one to see them . . .
oh, wait—that’s another riddle. Seriously, I’d love to know
who makes up these rules, seemingly just to drive everyone crazy. Don’t worry—your
vehicle can have speed, and there’s no difference between the speed of the vehicle and the vehicle’s
speed (or “vehicle speed,” if you prefer to avoid the controversy).
Q. In CMOS 6.28, the following example is used to illustrate an appositive with a comma: “Ursula’s son, Clifford, had been a student of Norman Maclean’s.” I know that the usage displayed in the last three words of the sentence has become mainstream, but surely it has not become correct?
A. The double genitive (or double possessive) has long been correct. Even the old Fowler’s Modern English Usage included it among the “sturdy indefensibles”: that is, constructions that may be illogical and ungrammatical, but are idiomatic nonetheless. Fowler quotes its use in the opening lines of Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra: “Nay but this dotage of our general’s o’erflows the measure.” (You can find this in Fowler’s under “of,” section 7: “Some freaks of idiom.”) Burchfield’s Fowler’s (s.v. “double possessive”) points out that the construction can serve a useful purpose, allowing us to distinguish between, say, “a picture of the king’s” and “a picture of the king.”
Q. What are the rules surrounding the use of fiction and nonfiction and fictional and nonfictional? I know the former are nouns and the latter adjectives, but can you say “a fiction passage”?
I suspect not—though I hear it all the time.
A. Yes, you can say “a fiction passage.” A “fictional passage”
is something different—a passage that isn’t real. A fiction passage is like a
paint sample or a love letter; they all involve nouns used attributively (unlike painted samples or loved letters).
Q. When referring to the house belonging to my wife and me, I have trouble deciding between “Libby and
my house” or “Libby’s and my house.”
Which is correct?
A. “Libby’s and my house.” In some contexts, the difference
could be critical. You might not want to say, for instance, “We put Libby and my house on the market.”
Q. Is there an acceptable way to form the possessive of words such as Macy’s and Sotheby’s?
Sometimes rewording to avoid the possessive results in less felicitous writing.
A. Less felicitous than “Sotheby’s’s”?
I don’t think so.
Q. I am proofing a training manual. It’s labeled “Participant’s
Manual.” Shouldn’t it be “Participants’
Manual”? Thanks.
A. The author gets to decide. “Participant’s Manual” is for
one person to use; “Participants’ Manual” is for two or
more. You might compromise with “Participants Manual,” where the first word functions
attributively.
Q. The following sentences were written by a student. “The three of us went to the Rangers’ hockey game. The leprechaun is the Celtics’ mascot.” Are apostrophes needed or do the sentences contain attributive nouns?
A. In these cases, the attributive might be more conventional, but the possessive is not wrong, and I would hate to discourage a student’s correct use of apostrophes. I’d give her a gold star, along with an explanation of the alternative styling as attributives. (For a more detailed explanation and examples, see CMOS 7.27.)
Q. The information posted on the Possessives and Attributives web page comes close to answering my question, but I would appreciate a more detailed explanation: Did we have dinner at the Smiths or at the Smiths’? I am tempted to omit the apostrophe if I consider the preposition at equivalent to German bei + dative plural, French chez, Italian da, etc. But if “at the Smiths’” is shorthand for “at the Smiths’ house,” perhaps I need an apostrophe. Is Smiths functioning as a genitive or an attributive adjective? What if, instead of Smiths, I refer to a group of people (residents, occupants) by some other word, e.g., We had dinner at the neighbors, Canadians, etc.?
A. Throwing a dinner “at the Smiths” works if you’re describing a food fight, but if you are at the Smiths’ (or the neighbors’ or the Canadians’), you are at the Smiths’ (or the neighbors’ or the Canadians’) place, and, as you suggest, the implied possession requires an apostrophe.