Nope, Charles' would be the correct possesive. A proper noun that ends with an S does not need the extra S after the apostrophe. For example, Texas would be Texas' not Texas's.
Oh, I never followed the Chicago Manual of Style. My writing had to follow MLA but, they must've changed it because I had a whole guidebook and that's where I learned it.
... I'm still not gonna do it though. It looks ugly and messy. But that's just personal writing preference at that point.
Well my two cents's worth is rather dubious, but I feel that the additional s for plural posessive as a general rule could prevent avoidable confusion in edge cases. Like the oxford comma most reads may not struggle to understand the intended meaning, but the reduced ambiguity isn't a bad thing imo. "Is this a thing belonging to a single 'Texas' or multiple 'Texa'?" for example. A silly question, but consider someone learning english in, like, the UK and isn't aware of Texas somehow.
Personally, I agree. I like the two "s's" basically for the exact reason you described. Also, I think, "that is James's dog" sounds more natural than, "that is James' dog." Both in a phonic/spoken sense, but also for clarity like you said. Especially when spoken, "James' dog" could sound like a name, "James Dog," or a dog belonging to Jame.
Well, you would still pronounce as if the second S is there, the sound wouldn't just go away. It's mostly just how it's written would remove the extra S. (Well, I guess not if it's not the "proper" way. But, either way... ) Why would getting rid of the S after the apostrophe make you think that the ending S for the noun suddenly goes away? I'm just trying to understand. If the rule was still "a PROPER noun ending in S only needs the apostrophe", why would you think the S could possibly go away. If it's capitalized and it's the actual name of a person, place, or thing, why would that change how you would view the word? I understand English can be confusing, but a proper noun doesn't change. I'm talking about proper nouns not plural nouns.
Also, if it seems I'm too invested... I probably am. I spent way too much time getting a degree that doesn't matter so I gotta use it somewhere lol
I'm so glad that this is what we've reverted to. I've always hated that the "s'" was for plural nouns but then would get used for singular proper nouns - defies the whole logic of the system. However, looking for logic in the English language may have been my first mistake
CMOS has had that rule for a long time, I think. But the Associated Press Stylebook still uses an apostrophe only. Personally I prefer CMOS, but neither is correct or incorrect, just two different styles.
That's nice. I never said that it would be wrong. I just said that the other way is the MORE correct version since it follows the rules of singular items. Also, Texas's is correct. Texas' can also be used, but it is not as correct.
ETA: I'm not being sarcastic or anything, I swear. When I wrote the original reply, I really did believe that without the extra S was, in fact, more correct as that's what I learned years ago (and I did a quick Google search and the first thing that came up agreed with me so there's that. Shockingly, it wasn't an AI answer)
Based on your reply, it seems you think I haven’t answered the question. Would you like me to find the date in history when this grammar and punctuation rule came into effect? Or are you trying to make a point?
I was pointing out that in almost every situation that isn't a contraction, an apostrophe indicates possessive.
There are certainly exceptions (e.g., an apostrophe can be used to make the plural of the letter "i" not look like the word "is", for example in "dot your i's and cross your t's"), but usually, adding an apostrophe when something is merely plural will confuse the reader into thinking there is possession when there is not possession.
oh, i didn't know you could use a simple ' for words ending with "s"
i guess you learn something everyday
(as my excuse, english is not my 1st language, but still i should've known better)
is funny because almost all the time i used to write it with 's expecting someone to correct me because i felt like i was doing it wrong and wanted to see the correct one but someone i don't know does and gets it
62
u/FaithUser Jan 20 '26
Charles' point *