| Lapas par tematu: < [1 2 3] > | "translators associations" or "translators' associations" ? Tēmas autors: Tom in London
|
|---|
KathyT 
Austrālija
Local time: 18:25
japāņu - angļu
| [OT] Photographic Evidence | Dec 8, 2008 |
Hi Tom et al,
You might enjoy these photos from others who share your passion (or, you may end up even more frustrated than now )
There are various groups on Flickr that have captured misplaced apostrophes, such as "Atrocious Apostrophe's" and ... See more Hi Tom et al,
You might enjoy these photos from others who share your passion (or, you may end up even more frustrated than now )
There are various groups on Flickr that have captured misplaced apostrophes, such as "Atrocious Apostrophe's" and "Greengrocer's apostrophe".
Enjoy! ▲ Collapse
| | | | Stuart Dowell
Polija
Local time: 10:25
Biedrs (kopš 2007)
poļu - angļu
+ ...
| Language flux | Dec 8, 2008 |
This looks like a case of language in flux; whereby a significant group of users are starting to use a new form, i.e. no apostrophe.
It's correct to that group of users because they accept it as correct.
In this case there is not yet a consensus. Therefore, the issue is in flux.
Most other elements of our language have come about through a similar process.
I have observed that langauge users are normally happy to accept new words or even ne... See more This looks like a case of language in flux; whereby a significant group of users are starting to use a new form, i.e. no apostrophe.
It's correct to that group of users because they accept it as correct.
In this case there is not yet a consensus. Therefore, the issue is in flux.
Most other elements of our language have come about through a similar process.
I have observed that langauge users are normally happy to accept new words or even new uses for existing words but are loathe to accept changes to grammer or in this case punctuation.
My own point of view is that I prefer the apostrophe and I don't like 1950's but I am ready to change when the time comes and I'm happy to give other uses a break if they prefer other forms - not in proofreading assignments though ▲ Collapse
| | | | RobinB
ASV
Local time: 03:25
vācu - angļu
| Very prescriptivist | Dec 8, 2008 |
Tom in London wrote: No Robin, there's no argument, it's imperative.
No it's not. It's an opinion.
The three words concatenated together "American Translators Association" are simply three words concatenated together. They mean nothing.
Again, the question of whether they mean something is a matter of opinion.
On the other hand "American Translators' Association" means "The Association of American Translators".
This is perfectly clear.
No it doesn't, and no it isn't. The "American Translators' Association" means "The Association of *the* American Translators", as opposed to the "Association of American Translators".
Apostrophes matter.
I know. I've most likely been using them for at least as long as you have, and I'm acutely aware of the horrors and risks associated with today's trend towards punctuation-free (or even "free punctuation") English (as opposed to the "light punctuation" English that I was brought up to use). In this instance, though, I think there are sound arguments for not using an apostrophe, and I reject any notions of a prescriptivist approach to this sort of thing. Fundamentalism has no place in the English language, and I'll even use the stop-free "ie" and "eg" that are favoured by the Economist and "Civil Service English" if that's what my client wants.
Robin
| | | | | Cross purposes | Dec 8, 2008 |
Tom in London wrote: RobinB wrote:
The jury's out
Robin Robin, it isn't out. There's no need to be confused. As I said in my first post in this thread: the possessive plural requires an apostrophe.
Robin did not dispute that possessive plurals require apostrophes.
The bone of contention is whether the word "Translators" is a possessive or just a qualifier, to describe the particular kind of association.
With other noun qualifiers, we don't treat them as possessives, although that is a mistake that I have seen non-English MT people make, e.g. file's server for file server. Research fund. Garage mechanic.
(Incidentally, meaning can easily be ascribed to "strings of nouns" without slinging possessives all over the shop - do you think you can get to grips with "document file server breakdown report approval meeting", for example?)
But these qualifiers, of course, tend to be singular.
Yet the American Translator Association... doesn't sound quite right - a very exclusive club!
And also the vast majority tend not to be 'people'.
Personally, it seems to me that discussions of this type are not about the grammar of apostrophes - most people agree possessives need them (except its, of course!) - but about the role that the word is playing.
So, here, in essence, can a plural noun used for a group of human being qualify another noun without it being taken that the role is a possessive one?
The ATA says yes, it can.
| | |
|
|
|
Giles Watson
Itālija
Local time: 10:25
itāļu - angļu
In memoriam
Charlie Bavington wrote:
The ATA says yes, it can.
Hi Charlie,
There's no need to bother our American friends.
My earlier example of apostrophectomy was the UK "Translators Association", which is a section of the Society of Authors and, like Tom, based in London
Giles
| | | | Tom in London
Apvienotā Karaliste
Local time: 09:25
Biedrs (kopš 2008)
itāļu - angļu
TOPIC STARTER | The difference between correct and incorrrect. | Dec 8, 2008 |
Charlie Bavington wrote:
The bone of contention is
there isn't one. Despite my fondness for Kant and Wittgenstein, or perhaps because of it, I have to assert that there are (a) correct ways of doing things and (b) incorrect ways. There are no grey areas, or bones of contention, in the correct ways of using apostophes in plurals. There is only (a) right and b) wrong.
However, in recent times, there have started to appear those who, unsure as to what is right and wrong, assert that there are "grey areas" in such matters as whether "everyday" should be written "every day", or whether "momentarily" means "in a moment".
I recognise their right to make their assertions, but I do not accept them. I have nothing to counter-assert.
[Edited at 2008-12-08 09:54 GMT]
| | | | | The Tractable Apostrophe, from Eats, Shoots & Leaves by Lynne Truss | Dec 8, 2008 |
Dangling expectations caused by incorrect pluralisation:
Pansy's ready (is she?)
Cyclist's only (his only what?)
Please replace the trolley's (replace the trolley's what?)
and best of all:
Nigger's out (a sign seen in New York, under which was written, wickedly: "But he'll be back shortly")
Unintentional sense from unmarked possessive:
Dicks in tray (try not to think about it)
New members welcome drink (doubtless true)
e... See more Dangling expectations caused by incorrect pluralisation:
Pansy's ready (is she?)
Cyclist's only (his only what?)
Please replace the trolley's (replace the trolley's what?)
and best of all:
Nigger's out (a sign seen in New York, under which was written, wickedly: "But he'll be back shortly")
Unintentional sense from unmarked possessive:
Dicks in tray (try not to think about it)
New members welcome drink (doubtless true)
etc. etc. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Tom in London
Apvienotā Karaliste
Local time: 09:25
Biedrs (kopš 2008)
itāļu - angļu
TOPIC STARTER
Sarah Jane Webb wrote:
Dangling expectations caused by incorrect pluralisation:
Pansy's ready (is she?)
Cyclist's only (his only what?)
Please replace the trolley's (replace the trolley's what?)
and best of all:
Nigger's out (a sign seen in New York, under which was written, wickedly: "But he'll be back shortly")
Unintentional sense from unmarked possessive:
Dicks in tray (try not to think about it)
New members welcome drink (doubtless true)
etc. etc.
Oh, woe is I !!!!!
[Edited at 2008-12-08 09:54 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
Giles Watson wrote: Charlie Bavington wrote:
The ATA says yes, it can.
Hi Charlie, There's no need to bother our American friends.
'Twas merely that they seemed to be the example which the thread had taken to using And indeed, the view of the ex-Pres of the said august body has been reported here.
A view which I re-cast in other terms in order to perhaps widen the field of discussion, take a step back and perhaps, just perhaps, attempt to clarify the point at issue (if all those things combined do not appear mutually exclusive to some degree).
(Side A: Possessives take apostrophes. That noun needs an apostrophe.
Side B: Take a closer look. Consider the possibility the noun is not a genitive case. Let's talk.)
It is all wasted effort. How Tom can assert that there is no "bone of contention" when this discussion crops up time and time again and the same explanation is given time and time again on both sidestakes my breath away.
Despite the "?" in the title, hinting at the possibility of discussion, I get the feeling someone just needed to have a little rant about something. I can rise above it, and seek intelligent discussion with those who actually want to discuss.
So, if anyone wants to toss around a few ideas during coffee breaks about whether the word "file" in "file server" is playing a different role to the word "translators" in "translators association", then lets do that. Meanwhile, I've got stuff to do.
[Edited at 2008-12-08 10:26 GMT]
| | | | Tom in London
Apvienotā Karaliste
Local time: 09:25
Biedrs (kopš 2008)
itāļu - angļu
TOPIC STARTER
Charlie Bavington wrote:
I can rise above it
Well done. For anyone else who's still interested, the use of "translators associations" in the heading of this thread is, in my extremely humble opinion, wrong.
So is "lets do that", Charlie. What's a let? What is it they do? Why did you tell us?
[Edited at 2008-12-08 10:40 GMT]
| | | | Jon O (X)
Apvienotā Karaliste
Local time: 10:25
holandiešu - angļu
+ ...
| What is wrong? | Dec 8, 2008 |
What does it even mean to be wrong in this context? The use of the apostrophe can only be 'wrong' in relation to the meaning which you ascribe to it, not on some grand cosmic scale. Interestingly, Dutch (and German) forms a genitive without using the apostrophe (e.g. Toms boek) and the apostrophe is conversely often used to form plurals (de auto's). The apostrophe itself is therefore not an autonomous bearer of meaning independent of the purposes which we use it for.
p.s. are... See more What does it even mean to be wrong in this context? The use of the apostrophe can only be 'wrong' in relation to the meaning which you ascribe to it, not on some grand cosmic scale. Interestingly, Dutch (and German) forms a genitive without using the apostrophe (e.g. Toms boek) and the apostrophe is conversely often used to form plurals (de auto's). The apostrophe itself is therefore not an autonomous bearer of meaning independent of the purposes which we use it for.
p.s. aren't the Eat, Shoots and Leaves brigade a tedious bunch? If the use of apostrophes really gets you into a rage, then I'd see a doctor. ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Tom in London wrote:
So is "lets do that", Charlie. What's a let? What is it they do? Why did you tell us?
Well, you see, that is what we language professionals would instantly recognise as a "typo" - a mistake, if you prefer.
Sometimes, us lesser mortals, we hit them keys the best we can but sometimes hit the wrong one, or don't hit it hard enough, and we make mistakes.
And if the text is not for publication/payment, sometimes we don't re-read it.
So well done you, you spotted a mistake.
I will be sure to recommend you to anyone who needs a proofreader.
For anyone else who's still interested, the use of "translators associations" in the heading of this thread is, in my extremely humble opinion, wrong.
Skipping merrily over the use of the word "humble" there, when you say "interested" in your opinion, did you mean literally, as I now suspect, that we should merely take interest in your opinion, take note, nod at your wisdom and move on, or were you at any point, as the "?" might have hinted, actually interested in discussing the point?
In discussing, as Robin suggested, that there could be a difference in meaning between "translators' association" and "translators association"?
In discussing the wider implications of nouns used as qualifiers for other nouns?
For instance, does the way that "a document template" is different from "a document's template" have any bearing on this discussion, or is it a red herring?
Anything like that.... anything at all?
This could actually be quite "interesting", if discussion is what you were after.
Yet, I fear it was not.
Edited to correct typos There may be others!
[Edited at 2008-12-08 12:28 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
Marc P (X)
Local time: 10:25
vācu - angļu
+ ...
| "translators associations" or "translators' associations" | Dec 8, 2008 |
RobinB wrote:
No it doesn't, and no it isn't. The "American Translators' Association" means "The Association of *the* American Translators", as opposed to the "Association of American Translators".
Gee, and I thought it stood for the "American Association of Translators".
Correct me if I'm wrong, but as I see it, the argument for "translators association" is that it is a compound noun, like document template, nail clippers, milk shake, user manual or car industry.
I appreciate that the qualification expressed by the juxtaposition can take several forms (a template for documents, a milk-flavoured shake, the car-related industry, etc.).
The problem I have with "translators association" though is that the qualifier is usually in the singular. When the qualifier is in the plural, my impression is that it only *sounds* correct because it is pronounced the same as the (singular or plural) possessive. You can test this using nouns as qualifiers for which the plural differs from both the singular and the plural possessive: tooth decay not teeth decay, foot injury not feet injury, child welfare not children welfare, etc.
Perhaps someone can produce examples in which the qualifier is clearly plural and for which the plural form of the qualifier differs from the possessive. Otherwise, for the compound to be acceptable at all, I would expect it to be "translator association". However, it appears to be much less common for persons to be used as qualifiers when a group is implied. "Child support", “customer satisfaction”, “patient care” may apply to a single child etc., but "translator association" can hardly apply to a single translator, since by definition, more than one are needed in order to form an association. I presume that this is why we have a women's institute and not a woman institute and a farmer's union rather than a farmer union. "Trades congress" is acceptable because trades are inanimate.
Marc
| | | |
I'll make recourse to the Chicago Manual of Style, which seems appropriate in the case of the ATA:
"The line between a possessive or genitive form ... and a noun used attributively--as an adjective--is sometimes fuzzy, especially in the plural. Although terms such as _employees' cafeteria sometimes appear without an apostrophe, Chicago dispenses with the apostrophe only in proper names (often corporate names) or where there is clearly no possessive meaning:
a consumers'... See more I'll make recourse to the Chicago Manual of Style, which seems appropriate in the case of the ATA:
"The line between a possessive or genitive form ... and a noun used attributively--as an adjective--is sometimes fuzzy, especially in the plural. Although terms such as _employees' cafeteria sometimes appear without an apostrophe, Chicago dispenses with the apostrophe only in proper names (often corporate names) or where there is clearly no possessive meaning:
a consumers' group
taxpayers' associations
children's rights
the women's team
a boys' club
but
Publishers Weekly
Diners Club
Department of Veterans Affairs
a housewares sale"
The case of "boys' club" makes a good illustration of the point. It seems to me that both "boys' club" and "boys club" (as in Boys and Girls Clubs of America) are both perfectly acceptable--the first implying a club that belongs to boys, the second implying a club that comprises boys. At the Good Book says, a fuzzy line indeed. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Time for an apostrophe break.... | Dec 8, 2008 |
Hi,
I am no native speaker of English, so sorry for "intruding," but let me start by saying that just like I am always interested in learning more about my own mother-tongue, Spanish, I am always interested in learning more about English, since this is the source language I normally translate from, so this thread, which I just noticed, really caught my attention.
I understand that in English, unlike in Spanish, there is no "royal" institution that you can contact to get... See more Hi,
I am no native speaker of English, so sorry for "intruding," but let me start by saying that just like I am always interested in learning more about my own mother-tongue, Spanish, I am always interested in learning more about English, since this is the source language I normally translate from, so this thread, which I just noticed, really caught my attention.
I understand that in English, unlike in Spanish, there is no "royal" institution that you can contact to get "customer support service" in case of language problems or queries.
So I guess whatever changes there may be related to certain grammar or syntax rules are just published separately by individuals (or academic-related institutions)?
(Like the already mentioned Chicago Manual of Style (for the USA) and the Oxford Style Manual (for the UK), which I assume publish a revised edition every so often.)
On the other hand, if you make a quick search in the Internet about apostrophes and the use of nouns related to possessives, you can find websites (of an academic type) that back both interpretations of the use of the apostrophe in this case. See:
http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/possessives.htm
Possessives versus Adjectival Labels
Don't confuse an adjectival label (sometimes called an "attributive noun") ending in s with the need for a possessive. Sometimes it's not easy to tell which is which. Do you attend a writers' conference or a writers conference? If it's a group of writers attending a conference, you want the plural ending, writers. If the conference actually belongs to the writers, then you'd want the possessive form, writers'. If you can insert another modifer between the -s word and whatever it modifies, you're probably dealing with a possessive. Additional modifiers will also help determine which form to use.
Patriots quarterback Drew Bledsoe threw three touchdown passes. (plural as modifier)
The Patriots' [new] quarterback, Drew Bledsoe, threw three touchdown passes. (possessive as modifier)
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/g_apost.html
Once you've determined whether you need to make a possessive, follow these rules to create one.
• add 's to the singular form of the word (even if it ends in -s):
the owner's car
James's hat
• add 's to the plural forms that do not end in -s:
the children's game
the geese's honking
• add ' to the end of plural nouns that end in -s:
houses' roofs
three friends' letters
• add 's to the end of compound words:
my brother-in-law's money
• add 's to the last noun to show joint possession of an object:
Todd and Anne's apartment
I have to say, though, that it sounds a bit confusing, especially if you are trying to teach this to ESL learners, but I guess that as long as you are "consistent" when applying either interpretation, then it should not be a problem?
Cheers,
Ivette ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Lapas par tematu: < [1 2 3] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » "translators associations" or "translators' associations" ? | CafeTran Espresso | You've never met a CAT tool this clever!
Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer.
Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools.
Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free
Buy now! » |
| | Anycount & Translation Office 3000 | Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
