Proper English: Use of the Apostrophe

The apostrophe ( ‘ ) is perhaps the most abused punctuation mark in the English language. There are two situations where an apostrophe can properly appear.

The first use of the apostrophe is within contractions. Some might say that contractions don’t belong in proper written English, but these days, there seems to be any number of proper places for slang or casual language to be used and understood without offense. Therefore, common contractions like don’t (do not), haven’t (have not), it’s (it is, it has), he’d (he had, he would), etc. appear often. The apostrophe replaces one or more letters, usually from the second word, such that the spelling approximates the common pronunciation of the phrase which has been condensed into a single word. Note that the space between the words of the original phrase is discarded within the contraction.

Some contractions are merely shortened versions of one original word, rather than a phrase, but these are generally considered a more extreme version of slang, and they are not as well accepted in proper written English. Examples include ‘n or ‘n’ (and), ‘cause or ‘cos (because) , wha’? or whu’? (what?). I personally avoid such contractions in all but the most private, casual writing.

The other standard use of the apostrophe is to indicate the possessive case of a noun, along with the letter s. The possessive form of a singular or plural noun appends ’s to the noun, except when the nouns already ends with s, in which case the possessive form appends merely an apostrophe. Examples: head of a cat -> a cat’s head, wife of Bobby Kennedy -> Bobby Kennedy’s wife, color of the dishes -> the dishes’ color, house where the Smiths live -> the Smiths’ house. Note that personal pronouns are special cases and do not follow these rules; these will be covered in a later post.

It is not correct to use ’s to indicate plural, although you will see this form used with numbers (in the 1900’s should be in the 1900s, and learn your ABC’s should be learn your ABCs.) so often that we sticklers of proper English might have to relent some day. Still, you have the choice of which way you’ll write it, and more people will find the non-apostrophized form agreeable than the apostrophized one.

Proper English: It’s vs. its

The words its and it’s are often confused and misused. But the rules are quite simple.

One word, its, is the possessive form of the word it. This word is an adjective (some might want to call it a possessive pronoun, but it acts like an adjective). Use this form when indicating ownership to a previously specified subject. Some examples: “The movie had its moments, but mostly I was bored.” “The mangy dog licked its mud-covered privates noisily.” “While outwardly expressing shock at the profanity in her student’s essay, Ms. Hannerty was secretly quite proud of its ingenuity.”

The other word, it’s, is usually a contraction of the phrase it is, and is thus a combination of a noun (subject) and verb. Some examples: “It’s a small world, after all.” “Damn it, Jim, it’s just a machine!” “I can’t tell if the timer is working properly, but it’s quite apparent that this bomb is unstable. Jump!”

It’s can also be a contraction of it has, where the word has is part of a verb in the present perfect tense. Example: “It has been a bloodbath” could also be phrased “It’s been a bloodbath.”

We’ll get into other pronouns, as well as the use of apostrophes, another time.

Proper English: Why Does it Matter?

Good spelling and grammar are just two of many factors that contribute to good writing. Of course, their presence often goes unnoticed and seemingly unrewarded, except perhaps by some English teachers and editors.

On the other hand, many readers definitely notice incorrect spelling and poor grammar. For them, such written errors may indicate an author’s laziness, fuzzy thinking, indifference to social norms, or even haste to publish without proper editing. These readers may choose to leave your website, blog, newspaper, or magazine due to irritation or confusion before you have made your point to them, and that means lower customer retention, advertising fees, or simply audience size.

Certainly, much written communications these days tends to be informal. Sentence fragments, cute word spellings, and slang all can be effective within the appropriate context. But why spell a word incorrectly when it gives you no advantage to do so? The only answer — other than laziness, fuzzy thinking, indifference, or haste — is simple ignorance of the proper forms of English.

The English language, in particular, is full of strange rules and inconsistencies, and it is notoriously difficult for native speakers of certain other languages to learn. So this author will occasionally write about various simple common mistakes of English grammar and spelling, just in case you want to help clean up your writing. Please suggest appropriate topics for future posts.

Slower traffic keep right

No, I’m not trying to make any kind of political statement here. I’m just trying to argue that this driving rule should apply in all cases, not just where signs indicate. (In the U.S. and other right-side driving countries; see strangemaps’ Driving Orientation).

The existing rules
Sometimes you see this sign. Often you’ll see one on hills or other spots along multilane highways or boulevards where traffic gets congested. It’s a good place for heavy trucks or underpowered cars to move over and get out of the way, right?

Some narrow highways have passing zones with an extra lane on long uphill grades, where you’ll see signs telling you to keep right except to pass. These exist for pretty much the same reason as the previous sign, just on a more temporary basis.

Some U.S. states (e.g. CO, OH) have passed laws in recent years which require you to keep right except when passing. I used to think was was stupid, but I’ve come to see its general efficacy, if only to get people into the habit. Of course, if people actually do it, the rightmost lane will wear out much faster than the other(s), but surely the state highway department is aware of this, and they are part of the plan, right? Maybe not, knowing how government bureaucracy works (and don’t call me Shirley).

For those of you who actually took a driver’s education class, you probably were taught (notice, I didn’t say “you probably learned”) to pass on the left, and to move right if someone wants to pass you. In fact, this is also the law in most states, at least on highways.

The reasoning
“But why should this rule be universal?” you might ask. Go ahead, ask. Nobody’s listening.

To grease the flow, as I say. (Pronounce “grease” with a “z”; it sounds cooler.) To lubricate the potential congestion spots. To regularize the traffic. To prevent highway constipation. You get the idea.

The more that driving behaviors can be normalized into a set of common expectations — habits, if you will — then the easier it is for everyone to do it with minimal complications. Face it, many of you don’t pay a lot of attention to your driving. At least, not always. So if you can a least be in the habit of doing the right thing (where “right thing” is defined as “what everyone expects you to do”), the smoother traffic can flow; the fewer accidents; fewer traffic jams; lower insurance rates.

The logical extension
How about we always do it? On every road — highway or boulevard. Busy road or empty one. Make it be the expectation. Always stay to the right when there’s somebody going faster than you in the vicinity.

This matters most when traffic gets really heavy. If the rule isn’t followed, then eventually you get everyone going the same speed, in every lane. And that speed is whatever the slowest car wants to do, because nobody can pass when both lanes are going the same speed. So, if you find yourself going the same speed as the guy to your right, and that’s the speed you want to go, then you need to figure out how to get into his lane. Slow down or speed up just a tad, long enough to find a place to move over. Then you will provide others behind you the opportunity to pass.

Sure, when you’re all alone on the road, it really doesn’t matter. But if you’re in the habit of keeping right except to pass, then you’ll already be in the right place when somebody wants to pass you. And they’ll be expecting to pass you on the left. Just like you, when wanting to pass somebody, will pass them on their left.

The Germans figured this out long ago, at least for their highways. And when everybody follows the rule (which they almost always do), traffic flows amazingly well. If you’ve ever had the pleasure to cruise the Autobahn, you’ve been impressed with how fast some cars are able to travel. Safely. Smoothly. Because their drivers can trust that only the cars that can actually go at the highest speeds will ever enter the leftmost lane, and that those who do, will indeed go very fast, and will give up their position to any car approaching them from the rear at an even higher speed. Okay, occasionally it requires a quick flashing of headlights, but from a long ways off, not right at the last second.

That’s the key — don’t let the traffic go the same speed in two different lanes. Keep the traffic greased.

Fallacy of “immigrants have lower incarceration rates” study

Last week, I read a few articles based on a 2/27 release from the Immigration Policy Center, telling us how new immigrants, whether legal or illegal, had lower incarceration rates than those with established U.S. residence, and that long-term residents and citizens have the highest incarceration rates. The authors’ conclusion was that people become more crime-prone as they live in U.S. society, rather than the popular perception that immigrants bring crime and criminal behavior with them.

There are many logical fallacies to this reasoning, but I’ll just start with one. Think of it this way: name a class of people who cannot immigrate into the U.S. Answer: “incarcerated people.” So the incarceration rate is exactly zero for brand-spanking new immigrants, and can only go up. So the whole report is useless.

A better study would have been to compare incarceration histories of people in the various groups, although this stillwould proabably be fairly useless since other countries likely have different success rates of locking up criminals, different sentencing, and even different survival rates of prisoners.

I’m not taking sides on whether the popular perception is true or not; that’s not my point.

Open fire.