"Bola Dimas putih."
Translation:Dimas' ball is white.
56 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
Up until now, it would not have occurred to me to use -s's where a possessive is involved in respect of a noun ending in -s. That applies to personal names too. However, you made me look up the rules and found that Fowler's Modern English Usage states: Use 's for the possessive case in English names and surnames, including those which end in s, thus -s,s. Examples: Charles's, St James's Square etc. It is customary to omit the 's when the last syllable of the name is pronounced as /iz/ as in Bridges', Moses' etc. There are a host of rules pertaining to the use of an apostrophe but this forum does not lend itself to studying English to the nth degree as, after all, we are here to learn the Indonesian language
I don't think that rule is hard and fast. In fact, it's very common (and often taught as the rule) /not/ to add an 's' when the when a proper singular noun already ends in 's'. For example: "Chris' book".
For what it's worth, of the potential rules, I kind of like the one this article suggests: https://data.grammarbook.com/blog/apostrophes/apostrophes-with-words-ending-in-s/
1193
Yes, there should be an apostrophe after "S" (Dimas').
Correction: Dimas is male (masculine) hehe!
2544
So how would you say 'Dimas' white ball'? 'Bola putih Dimas'? But wouldn't that mean 'a white ball is Dimas''?
Can someone explain how multiple adjectives work, and how to tell whether there is an implied copula or not?
The 's is needed even if Dimas's name ends in --s. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/punctuation/apostrophe#apostrophes_showing_possession
This is solved in Esperanto exercises by adding an element to the word bank that shows "--'s".
That element needs to be added to the Word Bank here too.
2544
The 's is needed even if Dimas's name ends in --s. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/punctuation/apostrophe#apostrophes_showing_possession
That is Oxforddictionaries' opinion on what is really a matter of style, not a grammatical law from on high. It is perfectly acceptable to take the opposing position that names ending in '-s' should simply take an apostrophe and no final 's'. Both of these practices have had long and widespread use. The English language has no governing body to rule that one is wrong and one is right (as much as Oxforddictionaries might like to pretend to do so).
While technically true that the "y of x" is equivalent to "x's y" in English, the latter is much more idiomatic, particularly in modern English. That's so true, in fact, that I think leaving out the former might be justified. It really depends on the intent of the course creators. :) For example, how many more permutations of accepted answers need to considered to make this allowance? Is it worth doubling the whole set?
395
There's no apostrophe signifying possession available in the English translation for this exercise.
241
Dimas should get an apostrophe plus an s, which is still not offered.
It looks weird to put an extra "s" after a name that ends in s, but when I speak the possessive, the second s is there, with a different sound than the s in Dimas.
Spelling "its" as possessive and "it's" for contraction looks more useless than adding an extra s to Dimas, since both forms are pronounced identically. However most of us do it because there can be ambiguity otherwise.