Writer's Group or Writers' Group?

TheIT · Mar 19, 2009

This punctuation has been driving me nuts. When you have a group of <somethings>, how do you punctuate the description when you say "<somethings> group"?

Writer's group, writers' group, or writers group?

Thanks in advance.

Chase · Mar 19, 2009

This is pure writers' group minutia. It makes me want to be a writer's group of one. Just kidding--I enjoy being in a group of writers.

TheIT · Mar 19, 2009

Chase said:
This is pure writers' group minutia. It makes me want to be a writer's group of one. Just kidding--I enjoy being in a group of writers.

OK, that helps. Because there is more than one writer in the group, it should be "writers' group" (plural possessive)?

Chase · Mar 19, 2009

Yep, that's my take on it.

There's probably a sentence where "writers group" would work, but it hurt my head to think of one.

Write4U2 · Mar 19, 2009

All punctuation hurts my head.

Commas are a buggar.

Italics rankle me.

I think I have them down pat, and somewhere or other it comes loose.

Damn. :rant:

Juliette Wade · Mar 19, 2009

I agree with Chase.
Writers' group - because there's more than one writer. I'm not sure what a writer's group would be, but maybe a group belonging to a writer, made up of fans?

Ms Hollands · Mar 20, 2009

This is such a simple part of punctuation to get right if you remember one rule.

The apostrophe comes after the word. An "s" is added if one doesn't exist. A single writer would therefore have the apostrophe after "writer" (like a writer's pen) while a the word for more than one writer is "writers" so the apostrophe comes after that whole word (like a writers' group).

It's then very easy to apply this to words that may be plural without an 's', like 'people'.

Priene · Mar 20, 2009

If the group's aim is to improve the efforts of the individual writer, I suppose it could be a Writer's Group. More likely, it's going to be a group run by a collective of writers, and that's a Writers' Group.

TheIT · Mar 20, 2009

Thanks, everyone. I think what was throwing me is that a "group" is a concept rather than a physical object.

Maryn · Mar 21, 2009

Of course, Writer's Digest doesn't make this any easier. Is the digest just for one writer? Of course not.

Maryn, easily annoyed

Write4U2 · Mar 21, 2009

gaaaaaahhh.... :rant:

Matera the Mad · Mar 21, 2009

One writer's writers' group is another writer's headache :roll:

RobJ · Mar 21, 2009

Writers group in a writers' group. One writer's group might differ from another's.

Cheers,
Rob

Mr. Chuckletrousers · Mar 21, 2009

In general, the enclitic, 's (or just ' after an "s"), stands in for the preposition "of". You can usually tell how to use the enclitic by deleting the 's (or ') and replacing it with the preposition to see if it sounds right. For instance, "Tom's house" can be rewritten "house of Tom", whereas "Toms' house" is wrong because that would mean "house of Toms". This is especially useful when the plural form is in play: e.g. "the sisters' house" becomes "house of the sisters", implying that the house belongs to or is inhabited by two or more females who are siblings.

Hence, "a writers' group" is correct, if by that you mean "a group of writers", but "a writer's group" would be correct if you meant the group a particular writer belonged to (the group of a writer).

Write4U2 · Mar 21, 2009

Mr. Chuckletrousers said:
In general, the enclitic, 's (or just ' after an "s"), stands in for the preposition "of". You can usually tell how to use the enclitic by deleting the 's (or ') and replacing it with the preposition to see if it sounds right. For instance, "Tom's house" can be rewritten "house of Tom", whereas "Toms' house" is wrong because that would mean "house of Toms". This is especially useful when the plural form is in play: e.g. "the sisters' house" becomes "house of the sisters", implying that the house belongs to or is inhabited by two or more females who are siblings.

Hence, "a writers' group" is correct, if by that you mean "a group of writers", but "a writer's group" would be correct if you meant the group a particular writer belonged to (the group of a writer).

Ohhhhh...yeeeaaaahhh!!! Thanks!

Ludka · Mar 27, 2009

Just to throw a monkey wrench in the whole thing.

If you have a plural, you add an apostrophe.

If you have a singular, you ALWAYS add an apostrophe "s", even if the word ends in "s" already.

For instance, if you know a person named "Madras", and he owned a shop, it would be Madras's shop, not Madras' shop.

It works the same for words that end in the "s" sound, but not necessarily an "s".

For instance, it would be Alice's shop. No one would say Alice' shop, would they?

So, to clarify. If it is a singular, ALWAYS add apostrophe "s".

Sincerely,

-Disgruntled Middle School English Teacher.

PVish · Mar 27, 2009

Adding another monkey wrench here: Is writers attributive or possessive?

If possessive, add the apostrophe. Writer's group for a group belonging to one writer; writers' group for a group belonging to more than one.

However, if the group is composed of writers, it's writers group. Writers isn't possessive; it's attributive. An attributive noun acts like an adjective (telling what kind).

Example: The Virginia Writers Club (no apostrophe); Publishers Weekly.

See here and here for more info.

(Yeah, I'm a retired English teacher.)

Ludka · Mar 27, 2009

Sheer genius, PVish.

In this case, I would certainly suggest that the writers group is attributive.

Of course........ you can also suggest that he group which is made up of writers is also the property of the writers, in which case it would be attributive and possessive.

The writers' writers group?

God, I love grammar. It's like math for language people. You grammar lovers most likely get what I mean.

Ms Hollands · Mar 27, 2009

PVish said:
Adding another monkey wrench here: Is writers attributive or possessive?

If possessive, add the apostrophe. Writer's group for a group belonging to one writer; writers' group for a group belonging to more than one.

However, if the group is composed of writers, it's writers group. Writers isn't possessive; it's attributive. An attributive noun acts like an adjective (telling what kind).

Example: The Virginia Writers Club (no apostrophe); Publishers Weekly.

See here and here for more info.

(Yeah, I'm a retired English teacher.)

I have this same battle with journalists who write "farmers association": is it an association consisting of farmers or do the farmers own the association? Both.

Chase · Mar 27, 2009

All of this is extremely depressing, especially the diabolic comparison of lofty grammarians to lowly mathematicians.

Seeking an end to it all, I went down to the waters edge. No, wait! Could that be water's edge?

Help! It's a witch's curse . . . witches curse? Whichever. . . .

mister_lister · Apr 2, 2009

This is a Satanic thread.

Think: group of writers.

Ludka · Apr 2, 2009

mister_lister said:
This is a Satanic thread.

Think: group of writers.

In which case it'd be writers group.

And, would this be the Satanic's thread? Or satanics thread?

ideagirl · Apr 2, 2009

Maryn said:
Of course, Writer's Digest doesn't make this any easier. Is the digest just for one writer? Of course not.

Maryn, easily annoyed

Was it originally "The Writer's Digest"? That at least would make sense, if you look at "the Writer" as an archetype in which all writers participate, rather than as an individual person who writes.

ideagirl · Apr 2, 2009

Ludka said:
In which case it'd be writers group.

And, would this be the Satanic's thread? Or satanics thread?

A group of writers wouldn't be "writers group." That doesn't make sense grammatically, though you see it a lot--"it" being missing apostrophes. Writers group means nothing*; writer's group and writers' group, in contrast, mean something. As for your question, if "satanics" is a subject (a la "physics" or "mathematics"), and this thread is about that subject, then you could say that. But I doubt that's what you meant...

* Unless you're using "group" as a verb: "The writers group around the entrance, waiting for the bookstore to open."

Ludka · Apr 3, 2009

ideagirl said:
A group of writers wouldn't be "writers group." That doesn't make sense grammatically, though you see it a lot--"it" being missing apostrophes. Writers group means nothing*; writer's group and writers' group, in contrast, mean something. As for your question, if "satanics" is a subject (a la "physics" or "mathematics"), and this thread is about that subject, then you could say that. But I doubt that's what you meant...

* Unless you're using "group" as a verb: "The writers group around the entrance, waiting for the bookstore to open."

See PVish's post #17 regarding attributive nouns.

Writer's Group or Writers' Group?

Infuriatingly Theoretical

It Takes All of Us to End Racism

Infuriatingly Theoretical

It Takes All of Us to End Racism

Interprets for aliens

Cow lover

Out to lunch

Infuriatingly Theoretical

At Sea

Bartender, gimme a Linux Mint

Sith happens.

Hath more hair than wit

Cat hair collector

Hath more hair than wit

Cow lover

It Takes All of Us to End Racism

Hath more hair than wit

Hath more hair than wit