Writing Guide - Written by darkrick

[ForsakenMage]

The Full Stop, the Question Mark and the Exclamation Mark

Written by darkrick

* indicate a badly punctuated sentence.

 

The Full Stop

The full stop (.), also call the period, presents few problems. It is chiefly used to mark the end of a sentence expressing a statement, as in the following example:

The British and the Irish drive on the left; all other Europeans drive on the right.

 

There is one common error you must watch out for. Here is an example of it:

*Norway has applied for EC Membership, Sweden is expected to do the same.

 

Found the problem? Yes, there are two complete statements here, but the first has been punctuated only with a comma. The simpilest was of fixing the example is the change the comma to a full stop:

Norway has applied for EC Membership. Sweden is expected to do the same.

 

Although this is correct, you might consider it clumsy to use two short sentences in a row. If so, you can change it in a different way:

Norway has applied for EC Membership, and Sweden is expected to do the same.

• Summary of Full Stops
  * Put a full stop at the end of a complete statement.
  * Do not connect two statements with a comma.
  

The Question Mark

A question mark (?) is placed at the end of a sentence which is a direct question. Here is an example:

Does anyone have a pen I can borrow?

 

If the question is a direct quotation, repeating the speaker's exact words, a question mark is still used:

'Have you a pen I can borrow?' she asked.

 

But a question mark is not used in an indirect question, in which the speaker's exact words are not repeated:

She asked if I had a pen she could borrow.

 

Here only a full stop is used, since the whole sentence is now a statement. The question mark also has one minor use: it may be inserted into the middle of something, inside parentheses, to show that something is uncertain. Here are some examples:

Piers Plowman is attributed to William Langland (?1332-?1400).

 

The question marks on the birth and death dates indicate that those dates are not certain. In the next example, the question mark is used to indicate the uncertainty of a name:

The Lerga inscription contains the personal name Vmme Sahar (?)

• Summary of question marks
  * Use a question mark at the end of a direct question.
  * Do not use a question mark at the end of an indirect question.
  * Use an internal question mark to show that something in uncertain.
  

 

The Exclamation Mark

The exclamation mark (!), know informally as a bang or a shriek, is used at the end of a sentence or a short phrase which expresses very strong feeling. An example of this is:

Aaarrgh!

 

Use of the exclamation point in ways similar to the above example is quite normal. But exclamation marks are usually out of place in formal writing. Using them frequently will give your work an almost childish quality.

 

An exclamation mark is also usual after an exclamation beginning with what or how:

What fools people can be!

How well Marshall bowled yesterday!

 

Note that such sentences are exclamations, and not statements. Compare them with statements:

What fools people can be.

How well Marshall bowled yesterday.

 

You can also use an exclamation mark to show that a statement is very surprising:

After months of careful work, the scientists finally opened the tomb. It was empty!

 

It is also permissible to use an exclamation mark to draw attention to an interruption:

On the (rare!) occasion when you use a Latin abbreviation, be sure to punctuate it properly.

 

Otherwise, you should generally avoid using exclamation marks in your formal writing. Don't write things like this:

*Do not use exclamation marks in formal writing!

*In 1848, gold was discovered in California!

 

Under no circumstances should more than one exclamation point be used. Such as this example:

*This is totally wrong!!!!!

 

It may be alright for personal writing, but it is completely out of place in formal writing.

• Summary of exclamation marks
  * Don't use an exclamation mark unless it's absolutely necessary.
  * Use an exclamation mark after an exclamation, especially after one beginning with what or how.
  

 

A Final Point

Note that a full stop, a question mark or an exclamation mark is never preceded by a while space. Things like the following are wrong:

How well has Darwin's theory stood up ?

 

A sentence-final punctuation mark is always written next to the last word of the sentence.

 

Fragments, the Comma, the Colon and the Semicolon

 

Fragments

A fragment is a word of phrase which stands by itself but which does not make up a complete sentence. They are very common in speech, advertisements and even newspapers. Usually they are used very sparingly in formal writing; when used, they should be followed by a full stop, a question mark or an exclamation mark, as appropriate:

Will the Star Wars project ever be resumed? Probably not.

We need to encourage investment in manufacturing. But how?

 

Fragments are quite acceptable in writing which is somewhat formal. But don't overdo them: if you use too many fragments, your work will become breathless and disjointed.

 

The Comma

The comma (,) is very frequently used and very frequently used wrongly. The rules for using commas are really simple, though complicated by the four distinct uses a comma may play. To begin, forget anything you've ever been told about using a comma 'wherever you would pause', or anything of the sort; this well-meaning advice is hopelessly misleading. The four types on comma are called the listing comma, the joining comma, the gapping comma and bracketing commas. Each use has its own rules, but not that a comma is never preceded by a while space and always followed by a white space.

 

The Listing Comma

The listing comma is used as a king of substitute for the word and, or sometimes for or. It occurs in two slightly different circumstances. First, it is used in a list when three or more words, phrases or even complete sentences are joined by the word and or or, we might call this construction an X, Y and Z list:

Lisa speaks French, Juliet speaks Italian and I speak Spanish.

You can fly to Bombay via Moscow, via Athens or via Cairo.

We spent our evenings chatting in the cafes, watching the sun set over the harbour, stuffing ourselves with the local crabs and getting pleasantly sloshed on retsina.

 

Note in both these examples the commas could be replaced by the word and or or, though the results would be rather clumsy:

Lisa speaks French and Juliet speaks Italian and I speak Spanish.

You can fly to Bombay via Moscow or via Athens or via Cairo.

We spent our evenings chatting in the cafes and watching the sun set over the harbour and stuffing ourselves with the local crabs and getting pleasantly sloshed on retsina.

 

Observe that you can connect three or more complete sentences with listing commas, as in the Lisa/Juliet example above. Note the difference here:

Lisa speaks French, Juliet speaks Italian and I speak Spanish.

*Lisa speaks French, Juliet speaks Italian.

 

Remember you must not join two complete sentences with a comma, but three or more complete sentences may be joined with listing commas plus and or or.

 

Note also that it is not usual in most placed to put a listing comma before the word and or or itself (though American usage regularly puts one there). This is reasonable, since the listing comma is a substitute for the word and or or, not an addition to it. However, you should put a comma in this position if doing so would make your meaning clearer:

My favourite opera composers are Verdi, Puccini, Mozart, and Gilbert and Sullivan.

 

Here the comma before and clearly shows that Gilbert and Sullivan worked together. If you omit the comma, the result might be confusing:

*My favourite opera composers are Verdi, Puccini, Mozart and Gilbert and Sullivan.

 

Here, the reader might possible take Mozart and Gilbert as the pair who worked together. The extra comma removes the Problem. A listing comma is also used in a lost of modifiers which all modify the same thing. This time there will usually be no and present at all, but again such a comma could be replaced by and without destroying the sense:

This is a provocative, disturbing topic.

Her long, dark, glossy hair fascinated me.

 

Try replaced the commas by and:

This is a provocative and disturbing topic.

Her long and dark and glossy hair fascinated me.

 

The sense is unchanged, though the second example, at least, is much clumsier without the commas. Observer the different in the next two examples:

She gave me an antique invory box.

I prefer Australian red wines to all others.

 

This time there are no commas. It would be wrong to write:

*She gave me an antique, invory box.

*I prefer Australian, red wines to all others.

 

Why the difference? In these examples, a listing comma cannot be used because there is not list: the word and cannot possibly be inserted:

*She gave me an antique and ivory box.

*I prefer Australian and red wins to all others.

 

The reason for the difference is that the modifiers this time do not modify the same thing. In the first example, ivory modifies box, but antique modifies ivory box, not just box.

 

In the second example, Australian modifies red wins, not just wines.

 

• So the rules are clear:
  * Use a listing comma in a list wherever you could conceivably use the word or instead. Do not use a listing comma anywhere else.
  * Put a listing comma before and or or only if this is necessary to make your meaning clear.

 

The Joining Comma

the joining comma is only slightly different from the listing comma. It is used to join two complete sentences into a single sentence, and it must be followed by a suitable connecting word. The connecting words which can be used in this way are and, or, but, while and yet. Here are some examples:

Norway has applied to join the EC, and Sweden is expected to do the same.

You must hand in your essay by Friday, or you will receive a mark of zero.

Britain has long been isolated in Europe, but now she is beginning to find allies.

Billions of dollars have been hurled into the Star Wars projects, yet we appear to have nothing to show for the colossal expenditure.

A dropped goal counts three points in rugby union, while in rugby league it only counts one point.

 

Remember you cannot join two sentences with a comma unless you also you one of these connecting words.

 

Joining two complete sentences with a comma without a joining word is one of the commonest of all punctuation errors, but one of the easiest to avoid if you pay a little attention to what you're writing. Either you must follow the comma with one of the connecting words, or you must replace the comma with a semicolon, as will be explained further on. Despite what may have been taught, the connecting words however, therefore, hence, consequently, nevertheless and thus cannot be used after a joining comma. The above words require a semicolon, and not a comma to be implemented correctly.

• Use a joining comma to join two complete sentences with one of the words and, or, but, yet or while. Do not use a joining comma in any other way.
  

 

The Gapping Comma

The gapping comma is very easy. We use a gapping comma to show that one or more words have been left out when the missing words would simply repeat the words already used earlier on in the same sentence. Here is an example:

Some Norwegians wanted to base their national language on the speech of the capital city; others, on the speech of the rural countryside.

 

The gapping comma here shows that the words wanted to base their national language, which might have been repeated, have instead been omitted. Gapping commas are not always strictly necessary: you can leave them out if the sentence is perfectly clear without them:

Italy is famous for her composers and musicians, France for her chefs and philosophers, and Poland for her mathematicians and logicians.

 

Use your judgment: if a sentence seems clear without gapping commas, don't use them; if you have doubts, put them in.

 

Bracketing Commas

Bracketing Commas (also called isolating commas) do a very different job from the other three types. These are the most frequently used type of comma, and they cause more problems than the other types put together. The rule is: a pair of bracketing commas is used to mark off a weak interruption of the sentence - that is, an interruption which does not disturb the smooth floor of the sentence. Note that word 'pair': bracketing commas, in principle at least, always occur in pairs, thought sometimes one of them is not written, as explained below:

These findings, we would suggest, cast doubt upon his hypothesis.

Schliemann, of course, did his digging before modern archaeology was invented.

Darwin's 'Origin of Species', published in 1859, revolutionized biological thinking.

 

In each case a weak interruption has been set off by a pair of bracketing commas. Now notice something important: in every one of these examples, the weak interruption set off by bracketing commas could, in principle, be removed from the sentence, and the result would still be a complete sentence that made good sense. This is always the case with bracketing commas, and gives you a simple way of checking your punctuation. If you have set off words by bracketing commas, and you can't remove them without destroying the sentence, you have done something wrong. An example of poor use of bracketing commas is:

*Yet, outside that door, lay a whole new world.

 

If you try to remove the words within the commas, outside the door, the result is Yet lay a whole new world, which is not a sentence. The problem here is that outside that door is not an interruption at all: it's an essential part of the sentence. Since bracketing comma really do confuse many people, let's look at some further examples:

*Stanley was a determined, even ruthless figure.

 

Problem? Well that comma can't possibly be a listing, joining or gapping comma; therefore it must be intended as a bracketing comma. But where is the interruption it is trying to bracket? It can't be the three words at the end: *Stanley was a determined is so much gibberish. In fact, the weak interruption here is the phrase even ruthless, and the bracketing commas should show this:

Stanley was a determined, even ruthless, figure.

 

Now the bracketed interruption can be safely removed. Sometimes this very common type of mistake will not disturb your reader too much, but on occasion it can be utterly bewilding:

*The Third Partition of Poland was the last, and undoubtedly the most humiliating act in the sorry decline of the once-powerful kingdom.

 

Here the sequence before the comma, The Third Partition of Poland was the last, seems to make sense by itself, but unfortunately not the sense that the writer intends. With only one comma, the reader will surely assume the writer means 'The Third Partition of Poland was the last [partition of Poland]', will go on to assume that the word undoubtedly begins another statement, and will be left floundering when she abruptly comes to a full stop instead of a verb. The essential second bracketing comma removes the problem:

The Third Partition of Poland was the last, and undoubtedly the most humiliating, act in the sorry decline of the once-powerful kingdom.

 

Here is another example of a type which often causes trouble:

The people of Cornwall, who depend upon fishing for their livelihood, are up in arms over the new EC quotas.

 

As always, in principle remove the bracketed interruption to produce a sensible sentence:

The people of Cornwall are up in arms over the new EC quotas.

 

But note carefully: this sentence is talking about all the people of Cornwall, and not just some of the, and hence so was the original sentence. The weak interruption in the original sentence is merely adding some extra information about the people of Cornwall. Now consider this different example:

The people of Cornwall who depend upon fishing for their livelihood are up in arms over the new EC quotas.

 

This time there are no bracketing commas because there is no interruption: now we are not talking about all the people of Cornwall, but only about some of them: specifically, about the ones who depend upon fishing for their livelihood.

 

The difference by the last two examples is the difference between what are called restrictive (or defining) relative clauses and non-restrictive (or non-identifying) relative clauses. A restrictive clause is required to identify what is being talked about, and it never receives bracketing commas. A non-restrictive clause is not required for identification, but only adds further information, and it always receives bracketing commas.

 

Sometimes a weak interruption comes at the beginning or at the end of its sentence. In such a case, one of two bracketing commas would logically fall at the beginning or the end of the sentence - but we never write a comma at the beginning or at the end of a sentence. As a result, only one of the two bracketing commas is written in this case:

All in all, I think we can say that we've done well.

I think we can say that we've done well, all in all.

 

Logically, the interruption may also fall in the middle of the sentence. Regardless of where the interruption is placed, it could be removed to give the perfectly good sentence I think we can say that we've done well.

 

There are a number of common words which typically introduce weak interruptions containing complete sentences. Among the commonest of these are although, though, even though, because, since, after, before, if, when and whenever. Weak interruptions introduced by these words are usually rather long, and therefore they most often come at the beginning or at the end of a sentence. There is just one case in which you might find yourself apparently following all the rules but still using bracketing commas wrongly.

 

Consider the following example:

Note that in each of these examples, the material set off by the commas could be removed without destroying the sentence.

 

The comma is clearly not a joining, gapping or listing comma. Is it a bracketing comma? Try removing the words before the comma. This appears to be a good sentence, and so you might think that the original example was correctly punctuated. But it is not. The problem is that the original sentence was an instruction to notice something, and the words note that are therefore and essential part of the sentence, not part of the interruption. The interruption clearly consists of the words in each of these examples. When we tried to remove the first seven words, we got something that was a sentence, purely by accident, but a sentence in which the original meaning had been partly destroyed.

• Here are the rules for using bracketing commas:
  * Use a PAIR of bracketing commas to set off a weak interruption which could be removed from the sentence
   
  without destroying it.
  * If the interruption comes at the beginning or the end of the sentence, use only one bracketing comma.
  * Make sure the words set off are really an interruption.
  

• Summary of Commas
  There are four types of comma: the listing comma, the joining comma, the gapping comma and bracketing commas.
  * A listing comma can always be replaced by the word and or or.
  * A joining comma must be followed by one of the connecting words and, or, but, yet or while.
  * A gapping comma indicates that you have decided not to repeat some words which have already occurred in the sentence.
  * Bracketing commas always come in pairs, unless one of them would come at the beginning or the end of the sentence, and they always set off a weak interruption which could in principle be removed from the sentence.

 

If you're not sure about your commas, you can check them by using these rules:

• 
  1. Can’t the comma be replaced by and or or?
  2. Is it followed by one of the connecting words and, or, but yet or while?
  3. Does it represent the absence of a repetition?
  4. Does it form one of a pair of commas setting off an interruption which could be removed from the sentence?
  

If the answer to all these questions is 'no' , you have done something wrong. Should you get the answer 'no' in every case, and therefore that comma shouldn't be there. Get rid of it.

 

Remember, you don't have to set off a weak interruption which bracketing commas, as long as the meaning is clear without them, but, if you do use bracketing commas, make sure you use both of them.

• In sum, them:
  * Use a listing comma in a list where and or or would be possible instead.
  * Use a joining comma before and, or, but yet or while followed by a complete sentence.
  * Use a gapping comma to show that words have been omitted instead of repeated.
  * Use a pair of bracketing comma to set off a weak interruption.

Commas and numbers will be covered later on under "Miscellaneous'

 

The Colon

The colon (:) seems to baffle many people, though it's rather easy to use, since it only has one major use. But please first note that the colon is never, never, never followed by a hyphen or a dash. Despite what you might've been taught or seen in school. One of the commonest mistakes is following a colon with a completely pointless hyphen.

 

The colon is used to indicate that what follows it is an explanation or elaboration of what precedes it. That is, you can use the colon to go on to explain a general topic in more specific terms. More general: more specific. A colon is nearly always preceded by a complete sentence; what follows the colon may not be a complete sentence, and it may be a list or even a single word. A colon is not normally followed by a capital letter, though American usage often prefers to use a capital. Here are some examples:

Africa is facing a terrifying problem: perpetual drought.

Explains what the problem is.

We found the place easily: your directions were perfect.

Explains why we found it easily.

I propose the creation of a new post: School Executive Officer

Identifies the post in question.

 

Very occasionally, the colon construction is turned around with the specifics coming first and the generalized summary coming latter:

Saussure, Sapir, Bloomfield, Chomsky: all these have revolutionized linguistics in one way or another.

 

Like all inverted constructions, this one should be used sparingly.

 

You should not use a colon, or any other mark, at the end of a heading which introduces a new section a document. It is however usual to use a colon after a word, phrase or sentence in the middle of a text which introduces some following material which is set off in the middle of the page.

 

The colon has a few minor uses. First, when you cite the name of a book which has both a title and a subtitle, you should separate the two with a colon:

I recommend Chinnery's book 'Oak Furniture: The British Tradition'

 

You should do this even though no colon may appear on the cover or title page of the book itself. Second, the colon is used in citing passages from the Bible:

The story of Menahem is found in II Kings 15:14-22

 

Third, the colon may be used in writing ratios:

Among French students, women outnumbered men by more than 4:1.

 

In formal writing, however, it is usually preferable to write out rations in words:

Among French students, women outnumbered men by more than four to one.

 

Fourth, in American usage, a colon is used to separate the hours from the minutes in giving a time of day:

 

2:10, 11:30. The British uses a full stop for this purpose: 2.10, 11,30. Either of which are generally acceptable in most places of the world.

 

Observe that, exceptionally, the colon is not followed by a white space in the last three examples, but is for all other situations.

 

The Semicolon

The semicolon (;) has only one major use. It is used to join two complete sentences together into a single sentence when all of the following conditions are met:

• 1. The two sentences are felt to be too closely related to be separated but a full stop;
  2. There is no connecting word which would require a comma, such as and or but;
  3. The special conditions requiring a colon are absent.

Here is a famous example:

It was the best of times; it was the worst of times.

 

A semicolon, in principle, can be replaced either by a full stop or by the word and, possibly preceded by a joining comma. Thus [bleep]ens might have written:

It was the best of times. It was the worst of times.

It was the best of times, and it was the worst of times.

 

The use of the semicolon suggests that the writer sees the two smaller sentences as being more closely related than the average two consecutive sentences; preferring to semicolon to and often gives a more vivid sense of the relation between the two. But observe carefully: a semicolon must be both preceded and followed by complete sentences. Do not use a semicolon otherwise:

*I don't like him; not at all.

*We've had streams of books on chaos theory; no fewer than twelve since 1988.

 

Both of these are wrong, since the semicolon does not separate complete sentences. The first should have only a bracketing comma and the second meets the requirements for a colon and should have one. If a suitable connecting word is used, then a joining comma is required rather than a semicolon:

Women's conversation is too cooperative; men's is competitive.

Women's conversation is too cooperative, while men's is competitive.

 

The semicolon was impossible in the last example, since the sequence after the comma is not a complete sentence. Note, however, that certain connecting words do require a preceding semicolon: Chief among these are however, therefore, hence, thus, consequently, nevertheless and meanwhile.

 

There is one special circumstance in which a semicolon may be used to separate sequences that are not complete sentences. This occurs when a sentence has become so long and so full of commas that the reader can hardly be expected to follow it without some special marking. In this case, we sometimes find semicolons uses instead of commas to mark the most important breaks in the sentence: such semicolons are effectively being used to mark places where the reader can pause to catch her breath. Consider the following:

In Somalia, where the civil war still rages, western aid workers, in spite of frantic efforts, are unable to operate, and the people, starving, terrified and desperate, are flooding into neighboring Ethiopia.

 

This sentence is perfectly punctuated, but the number of commas is alarming. In such a case, the comma marking the major break may be replaced by a semicolon:

In Somalia, where the civil war still rages, western aid workers, in spite of frantic efforts, are unable to operate; and the people, starving, terrified and desperate, are flooding into neighboring Ethiopia.

 

Such use of the semicolon as a kind of 'super comma' is not very appealing, and you should do your best to avoid it. Should you find one of your sentences becoming dangerously long and full of commas, it is usually better to start over and rewrite it:

In Somalia, where the civil war still rages, western aid workers, in spite of frantic efforts, are unable to operate. Meanwhile the people, starving, terrified and desperate, are flooding into neighboring Ethiopia.

 

In any case, don't get into the habit of using a semicolon (or anything else) merely to mark a breathing space. Your reader will be capable of doing his own breathing, providing your sentence is will punctuated.

 

The Colon and the Semicolon compared

The use of the colon and semicolon, although simple in principle, presents so many difficulties to uncertain punctuators, it will be helpful to contrast them here. Consider the following:

List is upset. Gus is having a nervous breakdown.

 

The use of two separate sentences suggests that there is no particular connection between these two facts:

 

they just happen at the same time. The only inference that can be drawn from this is that things are generally bad. Now see what happens when a semicolon is used:

Lisa is upset; Gus is having a nervous breakdown.

 

The semicolon now suggest that the two statements are related in some way. The likeliest of inferences in that the cause of Lisa's annoyances and the cause of Gus's breakdown are the same. Now try it with a colon:

Lisa is upset: Gus is having a nervous breakdown.

 

This time the colon shows explicitly that Gus's nervous breakdown is the reason for Lisa's distress: Lisa is upset because Gus is having a nervous breakdown.

 

If you understood the example, you should be well on your way to using colons and semicolons correctly.

• Summary of colons and semicolons
  * Use a colon to separate a general statement from following specifics.
  * Use a semicolon to connect two complete sentences not joined by and, or, but, yet or while.

 

The apostrophe, Hyphen and Dash

The apostrophe (') is the most troublesome punctuation mark in English, and probably the least useful. No other mark is so often misused or causes so much confusion. Take the usual retail store as an example. On one hand they offer *pizza's, *getting's cards and *ladie's clothing; on the other, the offer *childrens shoes and *artists supplies.

 

It is a blunt fact that the incorrect use of apostrophes will make your writing look illiterate more quickly than almost any other kind of mistake. If you find apostrophes difficult, I'm afraid, you will just have to grit your teeth and get down to work.

 

Contractions

The apostrophe is used in writing Contractions - that is, shortened forms of words from which one of more letters have been omitted. In standard English, this generally happens only with a small number of conventional items, mostly involving verbs. Here are some of the commonest examples:

it's - it is or it has

we'll - we will or we shall

they've - they have

can't - can not

he'd - he would or he had

aren't - are not

she'd've - she would have

won't - will not

 

Note in each case the apostrophe appears precisely in the position of the omitted letters. I advise you not to use the more colloquial contractions like she'd've in your formal writing: these things, while perfectly normal in speech, are a little too informal for careful writing.

 

Such contractions represent the most useful job the apostrophe has, since without it we would have no way of expressing in writing the difference between she'll and shell, he'll and hell, can't and cant, along with various other items.

 

There are a few words which were contractions long ago and are still written as such, even though the longer forms have more or less dropped out of use. There are so few of these that you can easily learn them all. Here are some of the commonest:

o'clock - of the clock

Hallowe'en - Halloweven

fo'c's'le - forecastle

ne'er-do-well - never-do-well

will-o'-the-wisp - will-of-the-wisp

 

Some generations ago there were rather more contractions in regular use in English; these other contractions are now archaic, and you wouldn't normally use any of them except in direct quotations from older written work. Here are a few with this longer written form:

'tis - it is

'twas - it was

o'er - over

e'en - even

 

Here are a few others which are often heard in speech:

'Fraid so.

'Nother drink?

I s'pose so.

'S not funny.

 

It is, of course, never appropriate to use such colloquial forms in formal writing, except when you are explicitly writing about colloquial English.

 

In contemporary usage, there are a few unusual phrases in which the word and is written 'n', with two apostrophes (not quotation marks); the most commonest of these is rock 'n' roll which is always written so, even in formal writing. There are more of these such as pick 'n' mix and possibly surf 'n' turf (this last is a label for a type of food). But don't overdo it: write fish and chips, even though you may see fish 'n' chips on takeaway signs or even menus.

 

Contractions must be carefully distinguished from clipped forms. A clipped form is a full word which happens to be derived by chopping a piece off a longer word, usually one with the same meaning. Clipped forms are very common in English; here are a few, with their longer terms.

Gym - gymnasium

Ad - advertisement

pro - professional

deli - delicatessen

hippo - hippopotamus

bra - brassiere (yes i know the second last e is meant to have a ` over it... just isn't support in notepad.)

tec - detective

flu - influenza

phone - telephone

copter - helicopter

cello - violoncello

gator - alligator

quake - earthquake

 

Such clipped forms are not regarded as contractions, are they should not be written with apostrophes.

 

Writing things like hippo', bra' and 'phone will, not to mince words, make you look like an affected old fuddy-duddy who doesn't quite approve of anything that's happened since 1912. Of course, some of these clipped forms are rather colloquial, and in formal writing you would normally write alligator rather than gator.

 

Important note: contractions must also be carefully distinguished from abbreviations. Abbreviations are things like Mr. for Mister, lb. for pound(s), BC for before Christ and e.g. for for example. Their use is explained later on.

 

Finally, there are a few circumstances in which apostrophes are used to represent the omission of some material in cases which are no exactly contractions. First, certain surnames of non-English origin are written with apostrophes:

O'Leary (Irish), d'Abbadie (French), D'Angelo (Italian), M'Tavish (Scots Gaelic).

 

These are not really contractions because there is not alternative way of writing them.

 

Second, apostrophes are sometimes used in representing words in non-standard forms of English: thus the Scots poet Robert-Burns writes gi' for give and a' for all. You are hardly likely to be

needing this device except when quoting from such work.

 

Third, a year is occasionally written in an abbreviated form with an apostrophe: Pio Baroja was a distinctive member of the generation of '98. This is only normal in certain sex expressions; in my example, the phrase generation of '98 is an accepted label for a certain group of Spanish writers, and it would not be normal to write * generation of 1898. Except for such conventional phrases, however, you should always write out years in full when you are writing formally: do not write something like * the '39-'45 war, but write instead the 1939-45 war.

 

Unusual Plurals

As a general rules, we never use an apostrophe in writing plural forms. For those who are unfamiliar with plurals: A plural form is one that denotes more than one of something. Hence the things that those shops are selling are pizzas, videos and fine wines. It is absolutely wrong to write *pizza's, *video's and *fine wine's if you just want to talk about more than one pizza, video or whatever. The same goes

with proper names:

She's trying to keep up with the Joneses.

There are four Steves and three Julies in my class.

 

Do not use an apostrophe when talking about more than one person with the same name.

 

In British usage, an apostrophe is not used when pluralizing dates:

This research was carried out in the 1970s

 

American usage, however, does:

This research was carried out in the 1970's

 

You should not adopt this principle unless you are writing for an American audience.

 

In writing plurals of numbers, usage caries. Both of the following may be encountered:

If you're sending mail to the Continent, it's advisable to use continental 1s and 7s in the address. If you're sending mail to the Continent, it's advisable to use continental 1's and 7's in the address.

 

Here, the first form is a little hard on the eye, and the apostrophes may make your sentence clearer. In most cases, though, you can avoid the problem by simply writing out the numerals:

If you're sending mail to the Continent, it's advisable to use continental ones and sevens in the address.

 

An apostrophe is indispensable, however, in the rare case in which you need to pluralize a letter of the alphabet or some other unusual form which would be unrecognizable with a plural ending stuck on it:

Mind your p's and q's

How many s's are there in Mississippi?

 

Without the apostrophes, these would be unreadable. So, when you have to pluralize an orthographically unusually form, use an apostrophe if it seems to be essential for clarity, but don't use one if the written form is perfectly clear without it.

 

 

Possessives

An apostrophe is used in a possessive form, like Esther's family or Janet's cigarettes, and this is the use of the apostrophe which cases most of the trouble. The basic rule is simple enough: a possessive form is spelled with 's at the end. Hence:

Lisa's essay

a week's work

England's navy

 

The rule applies in most cases even with a name ending in s:

Thomas's job

the bus's arrival

 

There are three types of exceptions. First, a plural noun which already ends in s takes only a following apostrophe:

the girls' excitement

both players' injuries

my parents' wedding

 

This is reasonable. We don't pronounce these words with two esses, and so we don't write two esses.

 

Second, a name ending in s takes only an apostrophe if the possessive is not pronounced with an extra s. Hence:

Ulysses' companions

Saint Saens' music

Aristophanes' plays

 

The final class of exceptions is pronouns. Note the following:

He lost his book

Which seats are ours?

The bull lowered its head

 

Note in particular the spelling of the possessive its. This word never takes an apostrophe:

*The bull lowered its head

The ' is wrong, wrong, wrong - but it is one of the commonest of all punctuation errors. The conventional spelling its is totally illogical, but it's none the less conventional, and spelling the possessive as it's will cause many readers to turn up their nose at you. Also, there is no English word spelled *its' - this is another common error for its.

 

The same goes for possessive whose: this cannot be spelled as *who's, though again there is a who's, a contraction of who is or who has.

 

Note, however, that the indefinite pronoun ones forms an ordinary possessives one's.

 

There is a further point about writing possessives: when you add an apostrophe-s or an apostrophe alone to form a possessive, the thing that comes before the apostrophe must be a real English word, and it must also be the right English word.

 

For examples, something like *Ladie's shoes is impossible, because there is no such word as *Ladie Moreover, a department in a shoe shop could not be called *Lady's shoes, because what the shop is selling is shoes for ladies and not shoes for lady, which is meaningless.

 

While we're talking about clothing departments and such, observe that there is at least one irritating exception: though we write men's clothing, as usually, we write menswear as a single word, with no apostrophe. By historical accident, this has come to be regarded as a single word in English. But just this one.