Fun LEGO Storage
Fun way to store your LEGO’s.*
Lots of fun color and sizes to store your LEGO’s.
*Yes, I know LEGO like you use LEGO for the plural version but since I don’t work at LEGO, it’s LEGO’s when it’s plural. I swear on my MegaBlok Hello Kitty if LEGO hires me, I’ll stop using the S.
| « Disney Planes: Graphic Novelization | Mattel Disney Pixar CARS: More Carnival Racers Coming, Wave 2 » |
12 May 2016
9 Comments
If I wrote the word, “Nerds,” should I add an apostrophe? Should I use quotation marks? Should the word be capitalized? And should the comma be inside or outside of the quotation marks? Just wondering. 🙂
(MET: Well, I do put the punctuation inside the quotation marks but I guess to be consistent, I’ll stop putting apostrophes on plurals unless it ends in an S).
depends if you’re talking about the candy or using it informally and whether or not the noun owns something.
whether or not your comma is within or without your quotation marks, your sentence still comes across so it isn’t as crucial. using apostrophe for possessive is not as clear. for example, “i like lightning mcqueen’s” isn’t even a complete sentence. “i like lightning mcqueens” or “i like lightning mcqueen’s cardback even though the people that pack at amazon are idiots and folded it in half and stuck it in a tiny box” are complete sentences.
Thanks for the clarification. 😛
actually it’s LEGOs, no apostrophe, because the LEGOs don’t own anything.
Chicago School of Style be damned!
Q. When using the plural of “ad,” i.e., “ad’s,” is it incorrect to use the apostrophe? The three-letter string “ads” just looks so wrong when typesetting it. Would appreciate your guidance.
A. “Ad” is just a regular word, and the plural “ads” is also regular, so there’s no need to mess with it. Plurals almost never take an apostrophe. Chicago style uses an apostrophe for the plural of lowercase single letters (x’s and o’s), but for little else (for instance, we write “dos and don’ts”). Please see CMOS 7.14 and 7.59–61 for more examples and exceptions.
http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/qanda/data/faq/topics/Plurals.html
(MET: That’s where my confusion started – some words have the s and others have the ‘s … I actually stared at it and decided the ‘s looked better. 🙂 … Of course, I see that the PERIOD inside the quotation mark is now about 50% outside so whatev … 🙂 ).
My complaint is mainly in technical writings, wherein new editors following Chicago Manual drop the apostrophe on things that industry itself has placed there. As an example, railway locomotive nomenclature uses F7 as a singular of that design of diesel locomotive, and F7’s to signify plural. Sure, you can write F7s — but what happens when some railroad has an “F7s” sub-class? That’s then a singular F7s, and to signify plural you need some way to do that too. Arcania at best, but generally accepted for decades until untrained folks came along and messed it up.
Another example. The Pennsylvania Railroad had the K4 class of Pacific (4-6-2), and a sub-class of K4s. So in writing K4s, did the author mean one K4s or plural for K4?
this is an excellent example how the breakdown of consistency in language causes miscommunication!
They should have made the sub-class as K4S, so plural would be K4Ss! 🙂
All of this is actually a huge pet peeve of mine. Can’t stand when people put apostrophes where they don’t belong. Like “DVD’s” or “CD’s”…it is just DVDs and CDs! When in doubt, leave it out!