How many uk.d-i-y members does it take to change a lightbulb?

[Bob Eager]

You asked for an example. You have proved that my example was appropriate.

[Tim Watts]

We always called it the "Three Letter Acronym" - since the 80s. Therefore, it's an acronym...

[bert]

There won't be any power to light the lamp if we stay in.

[bert]

One apprentice to drop the light bulb/lamp/lumiere and bring the whole thread to a fitting conclusion.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Not so. My request was for an example of where the use of an unnecessary one clarified rather than confused.

In your example, one sentence makes no sense at all.

[Bob Eager]

You have it back to front. The use of an unnecessary apostrophe in the first sentence clarified what was meant. Its lack in the second sentence served to confuse.

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

In article , on Tue, 20 Dec

2016, Peter Duncanson wrote

Agreed.

Mine too.

That may be the case for IBM, or have been at some time in the past.

Conventions change. Abbreviations (whether pronounceable, like RADAR, or have to be spelt, like URL) used to be spelt (if that's the right word!) with dots (followed by spaces) after the letters. The spaces went, followed by the dots - allegedly initially by the railway companies in Britain, to save paint and labour time, though that may be urban legend, around the 19th/20th century transition - but the dots at least remained in typed and printed text, fading out gradually around 196x to around

199x. Now, an abbreviation _tends_ to be shown by putting them in capitals, though with the decline of standards in general, such a consistency has many exceptions.

I would hold that a lower-case s following an upper-case abbreviation does not need an apostrophe, in fact that the apostrophe looks wrong: it isn't possessive (except in the rare cases where it really is, such as "the URL's middle section"), and it can't really be said to indicate omission, otherwise there'd need to be one after _each_ letter in the abbreviation. (Which not only looks weird, but is as tedious to type as the dots were, which is why they evolved out of use in the first place.)

[Clive George]

Or put another way, the apostrophe in the first sentence is unnecessary for normal grammar rules. "i's" is neither possessive nor an abbreviation, so one wouldn't normally use one there. Compare to "How many bears are there in Alaska?" - you wouldn't write "bear's". However putting one in helps clarity. Thus adding the apostrophe where not appropriate helps clarity.

[Bob Eager]

I agree that that works. But it's not the only way.

[Bob Eager]

Exactly.

[The Natural Philosopher]

"I's getting mah corncobs from da chillun!"

[The Natural Philosopher]

Except it doesn't help clarity. It introduces a possessive where none exists.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

We'll have to differ, then. One sentence makes perfect sense. The other one non at all, since 'is' doesn't exist as a noun.

I'm sure there must be a better example somewhere.

The use of an apostrophe on a plural merely shows a lack of education.

When you get to words in common use like its and it's it merely needs a bit of thought.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

I don't see that at all. The only possible time adding an apostrophe to a plural *might* aid clarity would be where that singular noun ends in an 's' Like say bus. But then the plural is buses anyway. ;-)

[Dave Plowman (News)]

I'd say even most kids would know the plural of bear is bears.

I'd love an example that really does clarify it's a plural. As the 'are' in the sentence does that anyway.

[dennis]

"How many of the letter i appear in initial?" is the way to clear it up. Adding an apostrophe obviously does not.

[dennis]

Hmm? The answer is brown bear, polar bear, grizzle bear, etc.

to "How many bear are there in Alaska?" without the s.

(PS I know some of them aren't in Alaska.)

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Only to those with a *very* limited grasp of English. Both spoken and read. Even the pronunciation is different between 'i's' and 'is'

[Dave Plowman (News)]

That is *not* the answer to 'how many bears are there in Alaska' Which would be a number. That answers 'what types of bear in Alaska'

What would your answer be to 'how many people are there in Alaska?' Those races resident there?

That would make more sense if asking about types.

In other words an apostrophe does absolutely nothing to help clarity - quite the reverse.

[Clive George]

The example sentence was

How many i's are there in "initial"?

Are you really saying that the apostophe there isn't adding clarity?