The Apostrophe Is Dead. Long Live the Apostrophe!

“The apostrophe,” according to R.L. Trask, author of The Penguin Guide to Punctuation, “is the most troublesome punctuation mark in English, and perhaps also the least useful. No other punctuation mark causes so much bewilderment, or is so often misused.”

The news, therefore, of the demise of the Apostrophe Protection Society has generated cheers in some quarters. But has caused consternation in others.

Apostrophe usage (or its misuse) has long been a contentious issue amongst the seemingly rational people who know about these things. And of little consequence to the vast swathes of the population who apparently don’t.

The Society was founded in 2001 by John Richards with the laudable aim of “preserving the correct use of this currently much abused punctuation mark”. In November 2019 he announced that he was backing out of the fight and closing the Society. Partly because he’s clearly got better things to do at the age of 96. And also because “the ignorance and laziness present in modern times have won”.  

Copywriters understand the importance of good grammar. And the role played by punctuation in helping to clarify meaning. But we also know that it’s important to break the rules sometimes.

But is it ever ok to break the apostrophe rules?

Lynne Truss, author of Eats, Shoots & Leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation, takes a predictably hard-line approach to this, regarding its misuse as, “an unequivocal signal of illiteracy [which] sets off a Pavlovian ‘kill’ response in the average stickler”.

One of the problems is that apostrophes perform several distinct functions in the English language. And their usage has evolved over the centuries. Inevitably, this has caused some confusion.

What are we to make of all this?

Part of the problem stems from the fact – often ignored by commentators – that the apostrophe doesn’t feature in spoken English. It’s only found in our written language. And as its use has also changed over time the rules are not always as clear cut as some strict grammarians might suppose.  

The apostrophe was first encountered in the 16th century. And was used to indicate an elision or a contraction. Think “stepp’d” for “stepped”. Or when Iago in Shakespeare’s Othello declaims, “Who steals my purse steals trash; 'tis something, nothing;/'Twas mine, 'tis his, and has been slave to thousands.”

By the 17th century printers were using the apostrophe to denote singular possession: “the boy’s hat”. And by the 18th century, this possessive usage had been extended to plural cases: “the boys’ hats”.

A few modern rules

Current punctuation rules have codified this to require an apostrophe:

• To show a shortened form of a word with a letter or letters are missing (“can’t” for “cannot”).

• To indicate possession (Singular: “the girl’s apple” ie. the apple belonging to the girl.” Plural: “the girls’ apples” ie. the apples belonging to a group of girls).

Inevitably, there are some wrinkles here. If a name ends in “s” then you only use the apostrophe and not the additional “s”, eg. Socrates' philosophy. Similarly, a plural noun ending in 's' doesn’t require the extra “s” (eg. My parents’ house). To do otherwise simply looks clunky.

• In some expressions of time, such as:

“They require a month's notice.” (Singular)

“They require three months' notice.” (Plural)

• When using a phrase like “do’s and don’ts”. Consider the potential for confusion if “do’s” was written as “dos”.

On the face of it, this is all quite straightforward. But it’s a common mistake to confuse plurals with possession. This is the famous “grocer’s apostrophe”. We’ve all seen them: 

• “MOT's While-U-Wait” (which should read “MOTs While-U-Wait”)

• “Best banana's” (which should read “Best bananas”).

• “Tasty snack’s” (which should read “Tasty snacks”).

Almost as common is to confuse “its” with “it’s”. This is an understandable mistake.

“Its” is what’s called in the jargon a possessive determiner. Used to show that something belongs or relates to something else: “the cat flicked its tail”. As “its” is already possessive you don’t need an apostrophe.

By contrast, “it’s” is a contraction of “it is” or “it has”. So, you do need an apostrophe!

Another common error is to write “1980’s” rather than “1980s”. But this convention – also applied to plurals of abbreviations (eg. “BBQ’s”) – no longer applies, at least in British English. Maybe they have a surplus of apostrophes in the United States.

We are not pedants

Sadly, getting any of these things wrong is often regarded as a mark of stupidity or indifference. It can generate self-righteous anger disproportionate to the perceived crime. 

Frankly, this is an over-reaction. It is also an offensive manifestation of snobbery and linguistic elitism.  

Several language experts have called for the abolition of the apostrophe given all the trouble it causes. But the reality is that it’s still with us. And probably will be for some time to come. Not least because it continues to serve a purpose. How else do we differentiate between “he’ll” and “hell”? Or “can’t” and “cant”?

So, we should make the best of it. Recognise that sound punctuation helps us communicate meaning. That incorrect usage is a sure-fire way of undermining your professional reputation. And understand that dodgy grammar in any form on websites and in marketing materials can cost businesses significant amounts of money as people steer clear of them.  

Some years back there was a popular criminological argument – the ‘broken windows theory’ – that coming down hard on visible signs of minor crime and anti-social behaviour would create an atmosphere of general order and lawfulness, thereby preventing more serious crimes. Long debunked, I wonder if the theory might nevertheless offer a way of considering the apostrophe problem.

The English language is full of ambiguities. Encouraging correct usage of this strange squiggle may feel like an uphill struggle. But surely, it’s incumbent on us to continue doing so to avoid a casual attitude to the application of the rules of grammar more generally.

Mark Twain once said, “Perfect grammar – persistent, continuous, sustained – is the fourth dimension, so to speak: many have sought it, but none has found it.” Quite right. But that shouldn’t stop us from trying.