It drives me crazy too (I guess that's obvious), and we're certainly not alone. I spotted this sig line on usenet years ago, and it still makes me laugh:
Contrary to popular belief, the apostrophe does not mean "Look out, here comes an 's'!"
As someone who's been guilty of similar errors in the past, I'd like to suggest that, perhaps, they are welcoming new things that belong to Joe. You never know.
I won't defend this at all, but I will point out a possible line of reasoning, however flawed:
For some numbers, groups of capital letters, and certain other groupings, the apostrophe is used when indicating the plural. They say it is to avoid confusion. Chatt State's use of "Joe" as an idiom (more than as a singular noun) may have made the word seem to belong to that special category.
It's still wrong, and they probably just goofed. I'm just willing to float them the benefit of the doubt on putting some thought into it, even if such thought didn't take the happiest path.
daniel: the only place I like misplaced ""s is in English translations of Mandarin consumer product names. See, there's good in everything.
I would have made the same error, based on the reasoning joe l mentioned. In fact, I remember puzzling over it a time or two when the option to do just such a thing came up, and deciding to go with the apostrophe rather than look up the correct usage. I figured it would make for easier reading. I think grammar is important for good communication, but at the end of the day, it is for the sake of the communication, not the grammar. If the grammatical rule really says one can't demark the plural of a person's name with an apostrophe, then I think that interferes with communication.
I thought the blooper was the lady making the universal "small penis" sign, second from left.
Just because something looks right doesn't make it right. It's no excuse. If you're just jotting something down, it's fine if you don't want to take the time to look it up, but if you're putting it on the cover of your course catalog, you damn well better check and be sure. If you can't be bothered with details, then why the hell should I take classes at your school? But that's just me.
smij, I didn't even see the sign until you pointed it out (and cracked me up).
And fletch, you obviously refer to the adverbial phrase? Clearly the adjective, "everyday," is acceptable as a single word?
Everyday is an adjective and is a single word. I just don't get the entire sentence. What is a joe? Is that slang word for some kind of human, or does it mean people with the actual of name Joe are welcomed "every day" (2 words). So the pamphlet is welcoming Joe's "everyday".."everyday" what? The noun for the adjective everyday is missing. I interpreted this as "welcoming average joes every day" as what the writer was trying to convey. These questions I ask are rhetorical..it's late.
16 comments:
that's great. i expected it to at least be hard to spot. but all those joe's must like to make their mistakes obvious.
why does this kind of thing drive me crazy?
It drives me crazy too (I guess that's obvious), and we're certainly not alone. I spotted this sig line on usenet years ago, and it still makes me laugh:
Contrary to popular belief, the apostrophe does not mean "Look out, here comes an 's'!"
As someone who's been guilty of similar errors in the past, I'd like to suggest that, perhaps, they are welcoming new things that belong to Joe. You never know.
Bill: was your grammatical mistake ever placed on something used to market a place of higher learning?
worst grammatical sin is putting ""s around words or phrases that don't need them. Example: we sell "nice" cars.
Well, unless the cars are suspiciously nice.
Or if "nice" is a code word for something. Like stolen. Or filled with cocaine.
I won't defend this at all, but I will point out a possible line of reasoning, however flawed:
For some numbers, groups of capital letters, and certain other groupings, the apostrophe is used when indicating the plural. They say it is to avoid confusion. Chatt State's use of "Joe" as an idiom (more than as a singular noun) may have made the word seem to belong to that special category.
It's still wrong, and they probably just goofed. I'm just willing to float them the benefit of the doubt on putting some thought into it, even if such thought didn't take the happiest path.
daniel: the only place I like misplaced ""s is in English translations of Mandarin consumer product names. See, there's good in everything.
I would have made the same error, based on the reasoning joe l mentioned. In fact, I remember puzzling over it a time or two when the option to do just such a thing came up, and deciding to go with the apostrophe rather than look up the correct usage. I figured it would make for easier reading. I think grammar is important for good communication, but at the end of the day, it is for the sake of the communication, not the grammar. If the grammatical rule really says one can't demark the plural of a person's name with an apostrophe, then I think that interferes with communication.
I thought the blooper was the lady making the universal "small penis" sign, second from left.
Everyday should be two words.
Just because something looks right doesn't make it right. It's no excuse. If you're just jotting something down, it's fine if you don't want to take the time to look it up, but if you're putting it on the cover of your course catalog, you damn well better check and be sure. If you can't be bothered with details, then why the hell should I take classes at your school? But that's just me.
smij, I didn't even see the sign until you pointed it out (and cracked me up).
And fletch, you obviously refer to the adverbial phrase? Clearly the adjective, "everyday," is acceptable as a single word?
Everyday is an adjective and is a single word. I just don't get the entire sentence. What is a joe? Is that slang word for some kind of human, or does it mean people with the actual of name Joe are welcomed "every day" (2 words). So the pamphlet is welcoming Joe's "everyday".."everyday" what? The noun for the adjective everyday is missing. I interpreted this as "welcoming average joes every day" as what the writer was trying to convey. These questions I ask are rhetorical..it's late.
yeah, that's another blooper on the leaflet. Joes or Joe's should be welcomed "every day". Not "everyday".
I applied for a PR-type job there a few years ago.
Clearly, the more qualified candidate got the job.
LOL! Clearly so.
Folks,
If you think THIS grammar-centered thread is hot, we'll be discussing verb conjugation over at my blog later this evening.
Awesome...oh, you said conjugation, not conjugal. Damn.
Perhaps it's a "play" on "everyday Joe's".
lol. Whatever they meant to say, somebody in the marketing dept. is hung like a bee... ;)
Post a Comment