Skip to main content

grammar - Possessive-S/apostrophe in a list, including the first and second person


When adding possessive-S/apostrophe to a list, the rule is only the last person has the apostrophe if the item is shared, or everyone has one if they have the items each, e.g.


John and Mary's houses = the houses that belong jointly to John and Mary.


John's and Mary's houses = the houses that belong to John and Mary as individuals, at least one each.


However, I am curious if the rules are slightly different when possessive pronouns are used for a single item.


You and Mary's house OR your and Mary's house?


I'm even more unclear when the first person is involved.


Mary and my house OR Mary's and my house?


Finally, when there are at least three people, including the first person, does the last named person have the possessive-S/apostrophe, or all/none of them?



  • John, Mary and my house

  • John, Mary's and my house

  • John's, Mary's and my house


I'd be very grateful to anyone able to clarify this, ideally with a some form of reference, as I can't find it anywhere.



There have been several suggestions to use "our", yet if the text refers to a group of people, all of whom own co-own houses with some others within the group*, then the above style wording would be necessary, so my question stands.


* eg I own a house with John and Mary, I co-own another with Peter and yet another with Philip and Sarah.




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more