Family Names and Apostrophes

After a long silence on this blog, I'm back with another common mistake I often see in emails. It seems most people just randomly stick in an apostrophe when writing people's last names thinking one is probably needed but clearly having no idea whether it is actually required or where.

As always, I'll keep the explanation as simple as I can, because English doesn't need to be difficult!

You do need to know whether you are using a family's last name in the singular form or the plural form, and whether you're using it as a possessive or not. This is the key.

Let's say my neighbors' last name is Schneider. There are two of them: Mr. Tom Schneider and his wife Mildred. They have a cat and two children.

I live next door to the Schneiders. 

I take care of the Schneiders' cat when they're away.

The Schneiders' children are noisy. 

Mr. Schneider's sister is visiting this week. 

In the first sentence, there is no possessive. The Schneiders don't own anything in that sentence. You need the plural form of their last name, Schneider = Schneiders. There are four Schneiders, and I live next to them all. You don't write "I have four dog's," so don't write that you "live next to four Schneider's."

In the second sentence, the Schneiders DO own something - the cat. The cat belongs to ALL the Schneiders (or they to him, but that's another matter). The apostrophe is needed to show possession.

TIP: When "the" comes before a family name, the name will always be plural, and the apostrophe will always go at the end, following the possessive -s.

In the third sentence, we see the plural possessive again. You see "the" before the name, and the plural form of the name tells you the children belong to both Mr. and Mrs. Schneider.

In the fourth sentence, we have "Mr." instead of "the" before the family name. The sister belongs to only one of the Schneiders, and therefore the apostrophe comes after "Mr. Schneider" and before the possessive -s.

TIP: When "Mr.," "Mrs.," or a first name comes before a family name, the family name will always be singular, and therefore the apostrophe will always be between the family name and the possessive -s.

When nothing comes before the family name, the writer or speaker is just being lazy. What should come before the name - "the" or "Mr./Mrs."?

Do you have Schneiders' phone number?           (This is one number for them all.)

Do you have [Tom] Schneider's phone number?   (This is one number for one of them.)

I'm going to give Schneiders a call.                    (No possessive = No apostrophe) 

Advanced course:

What if the family name ends with an -s or -ss or -z?!?

Don't panic. Let's take the family name Furness. The concept is the same, except that to make that name plural and refer to ALL members of the Furness family, you need to add -es to the name.

I live next to the Furnesses.    (the Schultzes)

I take care of the Furnesses' cat when they're away. 

The Furnesses' children are noisy.    (the Schultzes')

Mr. Furness's sister is visiting this week.    (Mr. Schultz's)

Summing up:

1. plural last name alone (no possessive) = no apostrophe
2. plural last name + possessive = -s' (apostrophe after the possessive -s)
3. singular last name + possessive = -'s (apostrophe before the possessive -s)

WRONG:

Which Berenbaum's what?
(found on pintrest, no original link)

Correct if what is meant is "Marble's cat lives here". WRONG if the cat's name is Marbles.

source

NOPE:

source

Correct, IF Jack and Lisa belong to a guy named Weston:

source

WRONG again, unless this house belongs to "The Drake":

source

For a house sign, the following examples are correct:

The Furnesses  [live here]

The Furness Family  [lives here]

The Schneiders [live here] 

[This is]  The Schneiders' Home 

[This is] The Furnesses' Home 

I hope that helps! 

ITS VS. IT'S

Don't make this one harder than it is.

ITS is possessive and only refers to something that belongs to IT.

IT'S is only a contraction for IT IS or IT HAS.  

That's IT.

You don't use an apostrophe for the possessives of other PRONOUNS, do you? Then don't use an apostrophe for IT either. IT is a pronoun as well.

Other PRONOUNS and their possessive forms:

I              my; mine           Where is my jacket?

you          your; yours        Where is your jacket?

he            his                     Where is his jacket?

she          her; hers            Where is her jacket?

IT            ITS                     Where is ITS leash?

we           our; ours            Where are our jackets?

you all      your; yours        Where are your jackets?

Yes, you use an apostrophe to form the possessive of someone's name (Jack's jacket). But someone's name is a proper noun and not a PRONOUN. Do not use apostrophes to form plurals of PROUNOUNs.

The squirrel tried ITS luck at the bird feeder.

Every dog has ITS day.

The committee has reached ITS decision. 

One way to test whether you need an apostrophe or not is to see if you can replace the word with his or her (which don't have apostrophes either!). "Every dog has his day" is fine. You don't need an apostrophe with "his," so don't use it for ITS, either.


When you want to write "it is" or "it has," then use IT'S.  IT'S only means IT IS or IT HAS.

IT'S going to rain today.         IT IS going to rain today.

IT'S not my problem.             IT IS not my problem.

IT'S been raining all day.        IT HAS been raining all day. 

Really, that's IT! If you're unsure if you need an apostrophe, simply test by replacing ITS/IT'S with "IT IS" or "IT HAS." If IT IS or IT HAS fits into your sentence, then use IT'S. If IT IS or IT HAS doesn't work for your sentence, then use ITS.

ITS / IT'S been a long time.    

             IT HAS been a long time. That's fine. Use IT'S.

The dog was chasing ITS / IT'S  tail.

             The dog was chasing IT IS tail.   Doesn't work. Use ITS.

We couldn't find the wounded deer because ITS / IT'S footprints were washed away.

             ....because IT IS footprints were washed away.    Doesn't work. Use ITS. 

Now go find an online quiz and practice. Remember, IT'S (IT IS) just not that difficult!

LIE vs. lay

I can make this one easy as well: Stop using the words "lay," "lays," and "laying". Just stop it.

     Yes, of course that's too simplistic, but you rarely need those words.

To be more specific, ONLY use "lay" where you could also use "put".

I want to lay down.       I want to put down.       

     (Doesn't work. Use LIE)    I want to lie down.

While I was laying on the beach...      While I was putting* on the beach...

     (Doesn't work. Use LYING.)    While I was lying on the beach...

Fido! Go lay down!      Fido! Go put down!

     (Doesn't work. Use LIE.)     Fido! Go lie down! 

My ___ is so lazy. He just lays around all day!    My ___ is so lazy. He just puts around all day!

     (Doesn't work. Use LIES.)    He just lies around all day!

You can lay your coat on the chair over there.   You can put your coat on the sofa over there.

     (This one is fine. Go ahead and use LAY.)   

You see, the word "lay" requires a direct object, just like the word "put" does. That means you must lay SOMETHING somewhere, just like you have to put SOMETHING somewhere. You can't just put.

    You can lay a baby in a crib.
    You can lay a coat on a chair.
    You can lay yourself down to sleep and pray the Lord your soul to keep.
    You can lay the book you just finished reading on the coffee table.

But you can't just lay. In the above sentences, the direct object (the thing you are putting or laying somewhere) is underlined.

*By "putting" I mean "placing," not the golf term.

**********************************************
Advanced course

Yes, sadly, the simple past tense form of "lie" is "lay". So the sentence "Yesterday I lay on the sofa for three hours" is correct. But why would you want to admit that? Why would you tell people where you were lying yesterday? They don't care.

Less vs. fewer

With the words "less" and "fewer" we have another common mistake in American English. The problem is easily fixed and has only to do with singular and plural nouns.

Here's the rule:

Use "less" with singular nouns, and use "fewer" with plural nouns.

That's it. I can't think of an easier way to phrase that, nor can I think of any exceptions.

Examples of singular nouns:
  time
  money
  patience
  rain

Examples of plural nouns:
  hours
  coins
  patients
  storms

I have less time now than I did when I was young.

It seems like there are fewer hours in the day to accomplish my to-do list.

She has less money than he does.

I have fewer coins in my piggy bank than I did last week.

My mom has less patience than my dad.

If my doctor had fewer patients, I wouldn't have to wait so long.

We get less rain here than they get in Washington.

There are fewer storms on this side of the mountains. 

These two words are not interchangeable. You cannot have fewer time or less hours. I've not heard anyone make the first mistake, but the second is common.

Our neighbor has less fewer flowers in her garden this year than she did last year.

 See? Good grammar doesn't have to be difficult!

U ≠ YOU!

This is another instance where I would advise you to STOP doing this in text messages, emails, on social media, and any other forum where you think it's ok. If you are over the age of 16, this is especially not ok. If you're under 16, it's a bad habit to start. If you are 16-18, I attribute it to laziness and/or a short attention span. Yes, I have seen this in formal essays students have turned in for a grade, which makes me wonder if students surely know they shouldn't use this "abbreviation" in college essays or on job applications.

If you are an adult, write like one.

Do what you want when you're writing or sending text messages privately to friends and family, but when you write publicly, please be a good example to others.

If you don't have time to type or text the two additional letters required for the pronoun "you", perhaps now is not the best time to be sending a message at all.

I certainly realize this makes me sound old-fashioned. My problem is that the American English language was rotting well enough before this trend started. This habit did not begin because people didn't know what was correct usage. It began with a deliberate decision stemming from laziness.

"Hey! I don't have to go through the effort of thumb-typing Y-O-U! 'Cuz 'U' sounds just like "you," and therefore I can skip two letters! Oh my god, that is SO cool!"

This also reinforces the common ideas that "spelling doesn't matter" and "The important thing is to get my point across," which probably arose out of Whole Language instruction.  When I read sentences, text messages, posters, advertisements, etc. in which the letter U is supposed to represent the pronoun "you," I am not interested in the writer's "point" at all.

And just for the record, if you are over the age of 16...
  ur ≠ your or you're
  r ≠ our or are
  r u  ≠ are you

Please use our language with style and intelligence. Don't be the person who is used as the example for how NOT to communicate.

Literally? I doubt it.

What is it with this word? Why do so many people use it nowadays where it doesn't make any sense? It does not emphasize your point and make your listeners more impressed with whatever you're saying. It makes it seem like you don't understand the meaning of the word "literally".

That class was so boring it was literally torture having to sit there.

Really?  Are you sure? Did you get thumb screws? Bamboo picks slammed under your finger nails?  Oh, I know - the teacher broke every bone in your legs by lifting a large wooden wagon wheel and repeatedly slamming it down on you as you lay spread-eagle tied to four stakes!  I just read a book set in the Middle Ages which included two scenes involving torture, and I assure you that forcing the unfortunate criminal to sit in a class at school was not one of the methods used.

That experiment literally blew my mind!

Eww. And still, like Humpty Dumpty in his dreams, somehow someone put you back together? That must have been ugly business.  "Blew my mind" is fine - there's nothing wrong with such figures of speech, until you add the word "literally".  Stop it.

Teenspeak: I am literally starving!

I don't like the use of this word to mean "rather hungry" with so many people in the world actually starving. If you are reading this on a laptop, Ipad, Smartphone, etc., you are not - and likely never have been - anything close to starving. Don't be an insensitive dolt. Just because you couldn't get your hands on a Snickers bar during the last two or even four hours - or because you had to skip one meal - doesn't mean you're starving. There is an extended period of "very hungry" before starvation ever becomes a threat.

I literally just wrote four paragraphs about this word.

Now, see? That one's ok, because "literally" means "actually," and I actually wrote four paragraphs. Are you duly impressed? Are you more impressed than if I had only written "I just wrote four paragraphs about this word"?  I doubt it. This word is unnecessary, empty, useless filler. It also does not help when you put aggressive emphasis on the word when saying it, or underlining when writing it.

I literally want you to stop using this word when you want people to take you seriously.

NEVER say "Me and..."!!

This one is easy, friends. Seriously - NEVER SAY "Me and..." no matter what follows the "and". I'll get to "me" vs. "I" in another post. Just get this one down, and never, ever say it. Don't write it either, even or especially on social media.

Me and my brother are going shopping after school.*

Do you want to go with me and Jim?*

I taught in a Catholic high school, and I told my students to "be the good Christian, and put the other guy first." I thought I was being witty and clever, and I was desperate for them to remember this simple rule. (It also sounds nicer than "People who say 'me and' will burn in the fiery pits of hell.") Use it if it works for you.

I would be satisfied enough if the rule ended there and people simply stopped saying "me and". If you don't remember what a subject or direct object of a sentence is, then stick to the above rule. However, readers who already have a good grasp of English grammar will know that there are instances when it does work.

The combination of [me + and] can be used if a comma is - or could be - inserted between them.
For instance:

She called me, and I agreed to meet her for lunch.

My brother punched me, and I punched him back. 

It's also fine in this sentence without a comma:

Me and you are both pronouns.

...but why would you ever need to say that?

 Just don't ever say or write "me and," and no one needs to get hurt.



* The red sentences should be:

My brother and I are going shopping after school.

Do you want to go with Jim and me?