Punctuation Question: Apostrophe Use

carrie8abug · May 28, 2011

Hi all! I've just finished my first MS and I am currently doing a hard edit. One question, when it comes to apostrophe use, keeps coming up, and I can't locate an answer on the Internet. The question I have is whether or not to use an apostrophe in the following instance:

He has a necklace of my mother's.

Or is the apostrophe omitted in this instance because of the use of the word "of"? Which would make the sentence read:

He has a necklace of my mothers.

Thanks in advance!
-Carrie

mscelina · May 28, 2011

The apostrophe is never omitted because of the word 'of.'

He has a necklace of my mother's.

Or, more simply and strongly--

He has my mother's necklace.

Snowstorm · May 28, 2011

What mscelina said.

carrie8abug · May 28, 2011

Thank you so much for the prompt response, so glad I found this site! Back to editing

dangerousbill · May 28, 2011

carrie8abug said:
He has a necklace of my mothers.

And this would mean that he had taken your mothers (all of them) and made them into a necklace.

Sarah Madara · May 28, 2011

dangerousbill said:
And this would mean that he had taken your mothers (all of them) and made them into a necklace.

I would read that story.

Bufty · May 29, 2011

He has a necklace of my mother?

Nope. Unless it's horror.

A portrait of my mother, maybe.

PeterL said:
"He has a necklace of my mother's." hs a double posessive. It would be better to write "He has a necklace of my mother." if you don't want to simply make it "my mother's necklace."

Matera the Mad · May 29, 2011

IceCreamEmpress · May 29, 2011

PeterL said:
"He has a necklace of my mother's." hs a double posessive. "

There is no rule in English grammar against double possessives. In fact, triple possessives are also fine: "He has a necklace of my mother's mother's." Or quadruple possessives: "He has a necklace of my mother's mother's sister's."

Though in that last example, "He has a necklace of my great-aunt's" would be less unwieldy.

LynnKHollander · May 30, 2011

The use of the double possessive is correct.
He has a necklace of hers.
He has a necklace of my aunt's.
He has a necklace of mine, and I want it back.

Bufty · May 30, 2011

Stop squirming and dreaming up rigged examples to try and prove your oblique point.

Stick to the question.

You think your suggested re-phrasing of the OP's phrase was clear and didn't look or sound clumsy and silly?

PeterL said:
Yes, there is no "rule" against double posessives, but they are unnecessary, look silly, and can be misinterpreted, in addition to being wordy and clumsy.

"The 'x' of 'y"' is identical in meaning to "'Y's' 'x'.
While I know who my mother's mother's mother's mother was, that isn't important, and it does not repeat that 'A' belongs to 'B'. If someone says or writes "the rocking chair of my mother's", then it is clear that there is something not quite right. On the other hand, if someone were to say "the wedding veil of my mother's mother's mother", then there is no clumsiness. In the second example "mother's" is an adjective describing "mother"; there is no duplication of the possessive.

JWZ · May 30, 2011

As stated by many respondents above, it is perfectly correct to use the double possessive. Consider this slightly altered example:

This is my necklace.
This is a necklace of mine.

Both are correct and, for all intents and purposes, they mean the same thing. But you cannot say "This is a necklace of me." It's ungrammatical.

A good example to illustrate why the double negative is necessary in English:

1. This is a photograph of me.
2. This is a photograph of mine.
3. This is my photograph.

The first example is clear: the person in the photograph is me. There is no indication of ownership of the photograph.

The second example shows clearly the ownership of the photograph (mine), but who's in the photograph is not so obvious. It may well be me in the photograph, but the photograph certainly belongs to me.

The third example almost certainly indicates ownership by me, but may also indicate that the photograph is of me. That has to do with the nature of a photograph (as opposed to a necklace or, say, a house). In practice, a necklace or a house cannot be made of “me”, but a photograph can have me as its image. In other words, no one will assume that “This is my necklace” or “This is my house” means that I am the substance of which the necklace or the house is made. At least not in a literal sense.

This is why machines will not soon replace writers and editors. Language is a beautifully complex enterprise.

But back to the question of correct or not: of course people use "incorrect" constructions every day, but that's common usage not writing. It's like clothes. Jeans are comfortable and friendly for everyday wear, but when you get married you want to dress it up a bit.

Writers can and should bend/break grammatical rules, depending on the situation, but only if they know the rules first.

JWZ · May 30, 2011

Sorry, you've got your declensions wrong. This thread is about the genitive, not the dative.

milkymoon · May 30, 2011

Oh you guys! No where else could you get so much humour out of a apostrophe and then follow it with a complex debate about possessives. Love it.

Chase · May 30, 2011

Matera the Mad said:

Chase begs popcorn from Matera.

PeterL · May 30, 2011

milkymoon said:
Oh you guys! No where else could you get so much humour out of a apostrophe and then follow it with a complex debate about possessives. Love it.

Oh, I know a place that is much worse, where a sense of humor is much more necessary but less commonly found. As it is, apostrophes are rather humorous in any case.

The degeneration of the English language is another subject.

Bufty · May 30, 2011

Phew! At last.

PeterL said:
The opening poster should use "my mother's necklace" rather than "necklace of my mother", because the former is clearer and uses fewer characters. .

Julie Reilly · May 30, 2011

^Actually the first person to comment said that also.

Bufty · May 30, 2011

Exactly.

But some folk prefer to huff and puff clouds of dubious knowledgable steam through which complex and irrelevant arguments have to be spouted before admitting the correctness of the simple conclusion others reached long ago.

Julie Reilly said:
^Actually the first person to comment said that also.

ResearchGuy · May 30, 2011

carrie8abug said:
. . . He has a necklace of my mother's.. . .

That is I believe, the most common form. Yes, the "of" indicates possession already, and the construction can seem odd for that reason, but compare: "He has a photo of my mother's" and "He has a photo of my mother." Different meanings.

Your sentence could be rephrased. "He has a necklace that belonged to my mother," or "He has one of my mother's necklaces."

I often see what looks like a redundant double possessive, and I often want to write in a correction, but like it or not, that is still, I believe, the most typical construction.

--Ken

ResearchGuy · May 30, 2011

PeterL said:
The opening poster should use "my mother's necklace" rather than "necklace of my mother. . . .

Only if she has (or had) only one necklace.

The original poster said "a necklace," not "the necklace."

--Ken

Jamesaritchie · May 30, 2011

PeterL said:
The opening poster should use "my mother's necklace" rather than "necklace of my mother", because the former is clearer and uses fewer characters. The expressions are of identical meaning, and "my mother's necklace" is morelikely to be used in the actual living English language. If the desire is to be pedantic or old-fashioned, then "the necklace to my mother" would be good, because that is pedantic andobsolete in English, which dropped the dative about a thousand years ago.

What, his mother has only one necklace? Poor woman.

Bufty · May 31, 2011

Does indeed seem a shame. But maybe she preferred lockets or pendants.

mccardey · May 31, 2011

Bufty said:
Does indeed seem a shame. But maybe she preferred lockets or pendants.

or, you know, real estate...

B.D. Eyeslie · May 31, 2011

Sort of on the same subject: Do you always use an apostrophe when deleting the "g" in dialogue involving runnin', jumpin', sunnin', funnin', etc.?

Punctuation Question: Apostrophe Use

Teh doommobile, drivin' rite by you

Baby plot bunneh sniffs out a clue

Retired Illuminatus

Freeway stomper extraordinaire

Where have the last ten years gone?

Bartender, gimme a Linux Mint

Hapless Virago

This space intentionally left blank

Where have the last ten years gone?

It Takes All of Us to End Racism

Where have the last ten years gone?

Where have the last ten years gone?

Resident Curmudgeon

Resident Curmudgeon

Where have the last ten years gone?