The Greengrocer's Apostrophe

[LongsightM13]

We have a winner, Didsbury Dave . . .
http://www.burtonmail.co.uk/News/Leave-it-out-.htm

BOSSES at a Burton bookshop have been left red faced after promoting a best selling title about grammar — with an erroneous apostrophe in the title.
Eats, Shoots and Leaves — The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation, by Lynn Truss, has become a million-selling publishing phenomenon, highlighting the widespread decline in standards of grammar and punctuation in everyday English — particularly the incorrect use of the apostrophe.
However, a display at The Works bookshop in Burton's Octagon Centre promotes the tome as Eat's, Shoots and Leaves.
The gaffe appears on a window display touting "10 Books you really should read . . . "
Perhaps bosses at the bookshop chain should take their own advice and read Truss' chapters on apostrophes.
A spokesman for the store admitted today: "It was probably a mistake, not someone's idea of joke."

 

[Didsbury Dave]

We have a winner, Didsbury Dave . . .
http://www.burtonmail.co.uk/News/Leave-it-out-.htm

BOSSES at a Burton bookshop have been left red faced after promoting a best selling title about grammar — with an erroneous apostrophe in the title.
Eats, Shoots and Leaves — The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation, by Lynn Truss, has become a million-selling publishing phenomenon, highlighting the widespread decline in standards of grammar and punctuation in everyday English — particularly the incorrect use of the apostrophe.
However, a display at The Works bookshop in Burton's Octagon Centre promotes the tome as Eat's, Shoots and Leaves.
The gaffe appears on a window display touting "10 Books you really should read . . . "
Perhaps bosses at the bookshop chain should take their own advice and read Truss' chapters on apostrophes.
A spokesman for the store admitted today: "It was probably a mistake, not someone's idea of joke."

That's a cracker! Get in there.

 

[117 M34]

I'm joining this thread late and have a question from an early post. (I can't qoute it becuase it is so far back in the thread (I think others can do this but I can only qoute from the last 10 or so posts))

Anyway it shows a picture saying - The fish guy's.

This was said to be wrong. Could it not be right though, if they are the 'fish guys' and that is thier shop i.e. the fish guy's shop with the word shop purposely being missing as is common and acceptable in the naming of a shop.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

I'm joining this thread late and have a question from an early post. (I can't qoute it becuase it is so far back in the thread (I think others can do this but I can only qoute from the last 10 or so posts))

Anyway it shows a picture saying - The fish guy's.

This was said to be wrong. Could it not be right though, if they are the 'fish guys' and that is thier shop i.e. the fish guy's shop with the word shop purposely being missing as is common and acceptable in the naming of a shop.

I'd agree that could be right.

Noone's answered my point about Harrods, though.....!

 

[Soulboy]

Harrods is a brand name and as such is exempt from the normal laws of language!

The name, without the apostrophe, probably scans better and gives it a perception that it is more than just a shop.. if that makes sense.

Harrod's sounds somehow more common... the fact that it is owned by someone, whereas Harrods has a certain style.

I might be miles off the mark, but I feel it "looks" better without the apostrophe.

By the way, was there ever someone called Harrod that originally owned the place?

 

[m27]

Harrods is a brand name and as such is exempt from the normal laws of language!

The name, without the apostrophe, probably scans better and gives it a perception that it is more than just a shop.. if that makes sense.

Harrod's sounds somehow more common... the fact that it is owned by someone, whereas Harrods has a certain style.

I might be miles off the mark, but I feel it "looks" better without the apostrophe.

By the way, was there ever someone called Harrod that originally owned the place?

King Harrod?

 

[quiet_riot]

Noone's answered my point about Harrods, though.....!

[
Harrod's is technically correct as it is actually implying Harrod's store but for reasons of space and convenience 'store' is omitted (not to imply it is a convenience store btw).

 

[Didsbury Dave]

Harrods is a brand name and as such is exempt from the normal laws of language!

The name, without the apostrophe, probably scans better and gives it a perception that it is more than just a shop.. if that makes sense.

Harrod's sounds somehow more common... the fact that it is owned by someone, whereas Harrods has a certain style.

I might be miles off the mark, but I feel it "looks" better without the apostrophe.

By the way, was there ever someone called Harrod that originally owned the place?

Yes there was.

Mohammed Alf Harrod.

 

[Anonymous]

Harrods is a brand name and as such is exempt from the normal laws of language!

The name, without the apostrophe, probably scans better and gives it a perception that it is more than just a shop.. if that makes sense.

Harrod's sounds somehow more common... the fact that it is owned by someone, whereas Harrods has a certain style.

I might be miles off the mark, but I feel it "looks" better without the apostrophe.

By the way, was there ever someone called Harrod that originally owned the place?

Yes there was.

Mohammed Alf Garnett Harrod.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I'm joining this thread late and have a question from an early post. (I can't qoute it becuase it is so far back in the thread (I think others can do this but I can only qoute from the last 10 or so posts))

Anyway it shows a picture saying - The fish guy's.

This was said to be wrong. Could it not be right though, if they are the 'fish guys' and that is thier shop i.e. the fish guy's shop with the word shop purposely being missing as is common and acceptable in the naming of a shop.

No it's not right. The use of the apostrophe signifies ownership or an abbreviation of "is". Clearly the latter doesn't make sense and therefore the only possible use is in the former context. But the way it's written implies that there is more than one guy. Therefore is should be "guys" (plural). If it was referring to a shop, then the position of the apostrophe would depend on whether it was one guy (Guy's shop - the guy: his shop) or two (Guys' shop - the guys: their shop).