Use apostrophes correctly - or else.

>> I think French teachers are a bit obsessed with this grammar stuff. And you care too much about teachers being mad at their students for misusing the apostrophe. But In the end, I think your point is more or less the same as mine... dear God, if we spawned this language, why do we complain about it? Our language is the way it is, if other people bother in learning it, then, shit, let's learn... a non-native speaker can't speak better than us... <<
_____________________________

Pete

I don't find my teachers are obsessed with grammar : it's important and nice writing your own language correctly and to use correctly the apostrophe is one element of this.

Some of my teachers are nice and some of them are stupid but I think it's correct that they're expecting some good level of study from the students. If you're making the apostrophe in the incorrect places or omit them, then it's not good level of writing. In my class everyone accuratly write such things.

I don't complain about french, english or not the other languages ; some things I find difficult, some are simple - but it's other thing that complain.

Also I disagree about if other people learn it then let's learn. It don't interest me what learn the other people, I learn what I find is important for me to learn. I suppose that they learn what's for them important.

For correctly write your own language, it include the punctuation and this is a fact. It's very stupid change it because you don't give sufficiently education to the young children. Also, if you read some books you can learn the apostrpohe - it's not complicated at all. The only people who I think can be allowed not writing correctly the apostrophe are the people who have learning disability but all the other people havn't excuse. It would be evidently bad eductaion.

I can add to this that sometimes I'm having problems correctly writing, especially capital letters and the letters putting them in the incorrect order. This is when I can't concentrate, and there's reasons for this but nevertheless I find it *very* annoying and on another day when I can concentrate and I read what I've written before badly then I'm very angry with me. So, it's not hypocrit : I see my faults and don't like them also, not only the point of the apostrophe. i didn't heard before that the apsotrophe was a problem for people because in Belgium I think that it isn't - only it is in english-speaking countries (it seems).

"The difference is that by omitting a comma, the message is very rarely misunderstood. The comma is a stylistic element, not one that actually promotes comprehension of the meaning."

OK then you believe that the comma doesnt promote comprehension of the meaning and is merely stylistic thats interesting but Id suggest that comprehending this passage would be a lot easier if Id included what you call stylistic elements such as the commas and periods instead of taking them out youll note too that I also omitted the apostrophes from this text but isnt it interesting that their absence doesnt create quite the same reading comprehension challenge as the omission of the comma period and for that matter the question mark that should be at the end of this sentence

"Now, its-it's, you're-your, they're-their... hmm. Say such a system becomes prevalent and the apostrophe completely extinct. Say I am a curious kid asking lots of questions. Do you care to explain why 'your' and 'you are' are even related? Why do we use possessives to say 'you are, it is, they are' but not to say 'she is'? Ah, I guess you'd have to explain the whole apostrophe thing in order to avoid ending up with a 'her' for 'she is'."

To be honest, I'm not actually sure I follow your reasoning at all here. But, what the heck. The obvious response is: with or without an apostrophe, you're still stuck explaining to your "curious kid" that we don't use "possessives" to say "you are, it is, they are."

"So why not get rid of everything many speakers get confused about and misuse?"

OK, why not? You tell me.

"[Y]ou specifically suggested getting rid of the 'standard' use of the apostrophe, if I am not mistaken; are you also advocating getting rid of 'you are' and replacing it with 'u r' exclusively?"

Actually, I'm advocating neither. Simply suggesting that if the apostrophe creates so much difficulty for so little worth, why keep it around?

"[W]what does mean balderdash - something like stupid or not good?"

It simply means "rubbish."

"So the soltuion evidently must be to educate them. Give them 3 lessons and it will be solved."

Dream on. If it were as simple as just three lessons, we wouldn't even be discussing the "apostrophe problem" here.

"I don't understand why particlularly apostrophes are difficult in a language with *very* weird spelling."

Guess what? I agree with you. But the fact remains, apostrophes do seem to be a problem. By the way, strictly speaking (ha ha!), it's not the language that has "very weird spelling," it's the written representation of it.

'[H]owever you may face the little problem that Calliope mentioned, how would you like to explain all this 'shes - her' stuff to a child, and how in the world would a poor English teacher explain this to EL's?"

I find your reasoning here as impenetrable as Calliope's. If there were no apostrophe, there'd be no apostrophe to explain. And again, the presence or absence of the apostrophe has nothing to do with your argument (see above).

<<it's important and nice writing your own language correctly and to use correctly the apostrophe is one element of this.>>

Yes, sure. What I meant when I said 'if other people bother in learning it, shit let's learn' is that we are native speakers of the language so we should speak it and write it properly when it is required. But we're free to use slang or colloquial speech or internet text writing whenever we want of course.

I didn't mean that you complain or anything, I was talking about English speakers. I mean, French grammar and spelling are complicated, so that's why French teachers try to make it clear. But some of them still seem a bit obsessed...

It's good, Pauline, that you make a concious effort to know your language properly... There are people who don't, or simply don't care... and you can see the results. Good for you :)

<<To be honest, I'm not actually sure I follow your reasoning at all here. But, what the heck. The obvious response is: with or without an apostrophe, you're still stuck explaining to your "curious kid" that we don't use "possessives" to say "you are, it is, they are.">>

We're still stuck?? stuck??? OK so what would you do, genious? just tell them that they don't have to worry about learning the reason because they're native speakers and it's not necessary at all? I'll tell you something... people who want to learn, like children, would not accept this response... But anyway what would you do then?

<<I find your reasoning here as impenetrable as Calliope's. If there were no apostrophe, there'd be no apostrophe to explain. And again, the presence or absence of the apostrophe has nothing to do with your argument (see above).>>

Well, if it seems impenetrable you should possibly open your mind... Personally, I try to understand your point... But you don't seem to be trying at all... It's like a student saying, 'Oh, this bit here is a bit difficult. Aw right let's leave it... Oh this part here is not necessary... what the heck I won't study it...' I suppose forgetting the apostrophe thing would occur in a very distant future, but in the mean time... face it! you have to learn it... it's your language...

erm... the above guest was me.. sorry

Pete from Peru

@12IH

Well, all I see here is someone who likes to argue for the sake of arguing. Nothing wrong about that, mind you, but do explain next time that we are going to play the "devil's advocate" game, just so we know what we are getting into.

Why I say this? The only reason why someone would not understand and indeed misinterpret what I said as badly as you did, would be if one was thick. And you are clearly not thick. So, I hope you had enough laughs, but I can only play this game pointlessly for so long.

"We're still stuck?? stuck??? OK so what would you do, genious? just tell them that they don't have to worry about learning the reason because they're native speakers and it's not necessary at all?"

I'd just tell this (extremely hypothetical) "curious kid":

Lots of words in English sound the same but have different meanings (homophones). Sometimes these words are spelled the same too (homographs) but sometimes they're not. The words "your," "youre" ("you're") and "yore"* all sound alike but have different meanings.

There are already lots of words that are homographs or homophones or both in English (lead/led, well, be/bee, read/red, maid/made and so on practically ad infinitum).

"Well, if it seems impenetrable you should possibly open your mind..."

I'd suggest that others could open their minds a bit too. I note there's often considerable blind obedience to the dictates of so-called "grammar authorities" here without too much thought about their relative validity.

"Well, all I see here is someone who likes to argue for the sake of arguing. Nothing wrong about that, mind you, but do explain next time that we are going to play the 'devil's advocate' game, just so we know what we are getting into.

Why I say this? The only reason why someone would not understand and indeed misinterpret what I said as badly as you did, would be if one was thick. And you are clearly not thick. So, I hope you had enough laughs, but I can only play this game pointlessly for so long."

I rather suspect that you say this because you just don't like your set notions about English being confronted.

* What if this kid asked: "Why 'Days of Yore'? How come knights didn't live back in 'Days of Mye' or 'Days of Oure'?"

The thing about apostrophes is they're not even always used. For instance, although "phone" is short for "telephone" we don't write that as 'phone.

That's because the word "phone" is now used as a proper word in itself rather than just a shortening of "telephone." So the apostrophe isn't used.

Does the word "managers" and "supervisors" require apostrophes?
All managers and supervisors are required to meet with the Assessment Team.

>>* What if this kid asked: "Why 'Days of Yore'? How come knights didn't live back in 'Days of Mye' or 'Days of Oure'?"<<

You do realize that individuals *can* deal with not just homophones but also homographs, do you?