Pedants' Paradise

[ahinton]

Particularly when playing the national antherm.

!!! - Wrong thread, though, perhaps...

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Is there one Baal, or several?

And, if the latter, would the collective noun be a "load"?

[french frank]

Ho, hum, Er ...

I think I might disagree in the case of a listeners' group, as it's a group of individual listeners' whereas The Beatles is the collective name of a group.

You might have a listener group though. Attributive nouns are nearly always singular.

The listeners belong to the group: the group does not belong to the listeners.

'The way we form this kind of noun compound (using one noun as a modifier for another) is not consistent and could be described as "in transition" '

I was once an examiner for the U of L 'Schools Examination Board'. The idea that you should add an apostrophe because the 'attributive noun' is plural has no logical or real basis. It is added by rote to follow the rule because the noun is plural without any thought of the meaning or the differing relationships between the two nouns. Nay, nay and thrice nay …

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

The listeners belong to the group: the group does not belong to the listeners.

I'm not so sure about that. The group is an abstract concept, incapable of owning anything. But I see the logic of the argument

'The way we form this kind of noun compound (using one noun as a modifier for another) is not consistent and could be described as "in transition" '

I was once an examiner for the U of L 'Schools Examination Board'. The idea that you should add an apostrophe because the 'attributive noun' is plural has no logical or real basis. It is added by rote to follow the rule because the noun is plural without any thought of the meaning or the differing relationships between the two nouns. Nay, nay and thrice nay …

This is a continuing debate on the Apostrophe Preservation Society's Facebook page. Neither side takes prisoners. I come down on the side of Visitors' Car Park, but the opposition maintains that the visitors do not own the car park.

[Pulcinella]

This is a continuing debate on the Apostrophe Preservation Society's Facebook page. Neither side takes prisoners. I come down on the side of Visitors' Car Park, but the opposition maintains that the visitors do not own the car park.

Do Pedants own Paradise?

[jean]

I was once an examiner for the U of L 'Schools Examination Board'...

Was that a different outfit from the University of London School Examinations Board, which I remember well?

[french frank]

This is a continuing debate on the Apostrophe Preservation Society's Facebook page. Neither side takes prisoners. I come down on the side of Visitors' Car Park, but the opposition maintains that the visitors do not own the car park.

What I'm objecting to is the idea that you have to have an iron rule which must be stuck to in order to be correct. First invent your rule; then you'll know what is correct and what not to say.

I would not say Visitors' Car Park was wrong, but nor is Visitors Car Park: it's a car park provided for the use of visitors. I can't see why that meaning would require an apostrophe.

[french frank]

Was that a different outfit from the University of London School Examinations Board, which I remember well?

It was indeed ULSEB. It had a notice on the front door which said, 'Please shake your umbrella before entering the building.' On the rather majestic old back door (which had originally been somebody's front door) there was a notice saying, 'This is not a door.'

[ahinton]

This is a continuing debate on the Apostrophe Preservation Society's Facebook page. Neither side takes prisoners. I come down on the side of Visitors' Car Park, but the opposition maintains that the visitors do not own the car park.

Who's to say that ownership is the only pertinent parameter in such a case? Whilst the visitors do not jointly or severally own the car park, to describe it thus is to denote that it is for their use (and presumably, by implication, not for anyone else's) so, as "Visitors' Car Park" clearly means "car park for visitors' use, the apostrophe after visitors seems not merely reasonable but actually correct.

[french frank]

Do Pedants own Paradise?

I sincerely hope not!

[Pulcinella]

I sincerely hope not!

I see: this is a paradise provided for the use of pedants.

[ahinton]

Do Pedants own Paradise?

No; they found it too expensive and couldn't get a decent mortgage on it; that said, I don't believe that Paradise is owned by the Aposptrophe Preservation Society or Facebook or those who debate on that Society's Facebook page or indeed prisoners or visitors either to the car park or to prisoners or prisons own it jointly or severally or as joint tenants or as tenants-in-common or in any other capacity either.

Phew! Exhausting business, all this pedantry!

[ahinton]

I see: this is a paradise provided for the use of pedants.

Indeed - otherwise and/or colloquially known as a car park for pedantic ideas and discussions!

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Who's to say that ownership is the only pertinent parameter in such a case? Whilst the visitors do not jointly or severally own the car park, to describe it thus is to denote that it is for their use (and presumably, by implication, not for anyone else's) so, as "Visitors' Car Park" clearly means "car park for visitors' use, the apostrophe after visitors seems not merely reasonable but actually correct.

[french frank]

so, as "Visitors' Car Park" clearly means "car park for visitors' use, the apostrophe after visitors seems not merely reasonable but actually correct.

That doesn't answer my question of why that necessitates an apostrophe. I've already said. 'I would not say Visitors' Car Park was wrong , but nor is Visitors Car Park'). This is clearly a debatable area on which there is no meaningful 'rule'. And why should there be?

If you want to quibble and say if something isn't incorrect it's therefore correct, so be it. But I wouldn't be one to declare such points of language 'correct' or 'incorrect' in the first place. I merely argue that an apostrophe is not necessary.