Sir – Ken Weavers (Letters, September 29) is misguided. We can always cope with the potential ambiguity when we hear ‘the boys marbles’ in context. We dont need it dumbed down in print.
In 1700 it was defensible to print man’s instead of mannes, because it had become one syllable. It was mad to print class’s. This ugly mess has killed a useful form. We now say top of the class, not classes top; and class teacher, not classes teacher. Among our best writers, Chaucer and Milton did not use this vexing letter ‘ at all. The First Folio used it for contractions, but not in (for example) ‘our deere Brothers death’. Samuel Richardson wrote of ‘a Hornet’s Nest’. Jane Austen wrote her’s. Sheep’s eyes can belong to more than one sheep. Adding a bizarre ‘ to goodness sake has always been optional.
In texts and tweets, people are already voting with their fingers not to use ‘. Its time for old-fashioned print to catch up.
Nicholas Lawrence, Oxford
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here