Re: Resumes and SMEs, Years v. Years'

Subject: Re: Resumes and SMEs, Years v. Years'
From: rose -at- ITLS -dot- COM
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 16:38:47 -0500

> I don't understand why you say the Chicago Manual says to use it "but
> without any discussion." It explains quite clearly and categorically
> that the apostrophe is used, and why.

If you know what "old genitive case" means, perhaps it's clear. But
it does not explicitly discuss why the apostrophe should not be
omitted. Is there no alternative to the "old genitive case"? Why
might some people mistakenly think there is? I assumed Chicago's
ruling was of the same weight as "Use the serial comma/Don't use the
serial comma".

Maurice Rose
rose -at- itls -dot- com

TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/ or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html


Previous by Author: Re: Resumes and SMEs, Years v. Years'
Next by Author: Re: Resumes and SMEs, Years v. Years'
Previous by Thread: Re: Resumes and SMEs, Years v. Years'
Next by Thread: Re: Resumes and SMEs, Years v. Years'


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads