good morning krogerers!

DA59 wrote:Everytime I see the gif in your signature at a quick glance it looks like a Laser Floyd show.

laser Floyd //chortle//

DA59 wrote:We have our End-Of-Year meeting later this morning so you'll have to do without me... as usual.

One showing scheduled so far today.

Oh my; I'm distraught , dismayed, and distressed!!

DA59 wrote:Dang, you're right!

yes, but that's not the point. We could easily say it was Johnny's and be in the same spot. I guess at that point you need to specifiy what Johnny's is. Is it a restaurant? Johnny's Restaurant employees?

I think it was just a poor choice in words and to leave it as Kroger's employees and no one would know the difference.

DA59 wrote:

//smack cruze

What? can't spell my name any more?

//smack dar

cruzer wrote:yes, but that's not the point. We could easily say it was Johnny's and be in the same spot. I guess at that point you need to specifiy what Johnny's is. Is it a restaurant? Johnny's Restaurant employees?

I think it was just a poor choice in words and to leave it as Kroger's employees and no one would know the difference.

if the testimony was "Kroger's employees" It's correct - since the name/word Kroger doesn't end in an s!!

AZGman wrote:if the testimony was "Kroger's employees" It's correct - since the name/word Kroger doesn't end in an s!!

Yes, you are correct, but I think poof said that it wasn't actually Kroger's it was something else. So maybe that something else actually does have the "'s" in the name so she's still stuck in the same boat, right?

I still don't know the rule, so...

cruzer wrote:Yes, you are correct, but I think poof said that it wasn't actually Kroger's it was something else. So maybe that something else actually does have the "'s" in the name so she's still stuck in the same boat, right?

I still don't know the rule, so...

If the name was Sears, it would be correct as Sears' employees.

DA59 wrote:Jeez, I fixed it right away. How long did you sit on that post before you remembered you had to click on the post button?

I was typing another post. I went back after I finished the first post to give you grief about that post.

//smack

AZGman wrote:If the name was Sears, it would be correct as Sears' employees.

In the case of Sears' it's pronounced like Sears's, not like Sears, right?

cruzer wrote:In the case of Sears' it's pronounced like Sears's, not like Sears, right?

yes! like Searses - if spelled sorta phonetically.

AZGman wrote:yes!

Thank you!

GEG, if you're lurking....HA! I told you so!

cruzer wrote:Yes, you are correct, but I think poof said that it wasn't actually Kroger's it was something else. So maybe that something else actually does have the "'s" in the name so she's still stuck in the same boat, right?

I still don't know the rule, so...

The name actually had the apostrophe in it, like Macy's.

Morning everyone.

Or we're all wrong

From wiki

What is the possessive case for words ending in s?
In: Grammar [Edit categories] [Edit]

[Edit]
While many still maintain that it is only a question of style, and while language is certainly fluid, there are actually general rules in this case:

Form the singular possessive of nouns ending in s with 's: Mr. Jones's dog, Maris's foibles, James's dissertation. The only exceptions are ancient proper nouns: Jesus' disciples.

However, you form the plural possessive of nouns by adding an apostrophe after the "s": the dogs' bones, the balloons' strings, the lollipops' centers.

In the case of the plural possessive of nouns ending in s -- as in, say, the family Jones and their collective beach house -- you add an es and an apostrophe at the end: the Joneses' beach house, the Moraleses' car.

(My information comes from Strunk & White. You can find exceptions to all of these rules, but they are the generally accepted rules.)

AZGman wrote:Or we're all wrong

From wiki

What is the possessive case for words ending in s?
In: Grammar [Edit categories] [Edit]

[Edit]
While many still maintain that it is only a question of style, and while language is certainly fluid, there are actually general rules in this case:

Form the singular possessive of nouns ending in s with 's: Mr. Jones's dog, Maris's foibles, James's dissertation. The only exceptions are ancient proper nouns: Jesus' disciples.

However, you form the plural possessive of nouns by adding an apostrophe after the "s": the dogs' bones, the balloons' strings, the lollipops' centers.

In the case of the plural possessive of nouns ending in s -- as in, say, the family Jones and their collective beach house -- you add an es and an apostrophe at the end: the Joneses' beach house, the Moraleses' car.

(My information comes from Strunk & White. You can find exceptions to all of these rules, but they are the generally accepted rules.)

Then according to those rules, it should be Macy's' employees.

Beautiful day, have a lot of running around to do. See you later.

cruzer wrote:Thank you!

GEG, if you're lurking....HA! I told you so!

damn... gotta go sign in as geg...

cruzer wrote:Thank you!

GEG, if you're lurking....HA! I told you so!

Fine. I was just saying that's not what I learned. I learned if it ends in an s and it's possessive, then you put the apostrophe but you only but the second s after the apostrophe if you say another s sound.

So for example: put the 's on James's hat
don't put the s after the apostrophe on the boys' bathroom.

You don't put the second s on unless you say another s sound, just like you don't say another s sound if there's not an 's there.

If I'm wrong about that, I'm wrong, but that's what I learned in college and it makes a lot of sense to me.

greeneyedgal wrote:Fine. I was just saying that's not what I learned. I learned if it ends in an s and it's possessive, then you put the apostrophe but you only but the second s after the apostrophe if you say another s sound.

So for example: put the 's on James's hat
don't put the s after the apostrophe on the boys' bathroom.

You don't put the second s on unless you say another s sound, just like you don't say another s sound if there's not an 's there.

If I'm wrong about that, I'm wrong, but that's what I learned in college and it makes a lot of sense to me.

Yes, that's correct. That accounts for the s's, but not the apostrophes.

Morning all. . .

All this discussion of appostrophies is going to have me messing up my possives isn't it? It's bad enough I don't have a spell checker at work!

pooflady wrote:Yes, that's correct. That accounts for the s's, but not the apostrophes.

eventually we'll get it all figured out!

cruzer wrote:eventually we'll get it all figured out!

sure, but then I'll start having issues with it. Seriously, I had no problem with homonyms until I started hanging out here, now I mess up my theirs and my heres, and a few others. . .

KtCallista wrote:sure, but then I'll start having issues with it. Seriously, I had no problem with homonyms until I started hanging out here, now I mess up my theirs and my heres, and a few others. . .

Just imagine how this poor English student feels!

cruzer wrote:Just imagine how this poor English student feels!

Is this GEG again?

KtCallista wrote:Is this GEG again?

no...

I truly was a poor English student...

cruzer wrote:no...

I truly was a poor English student...

really? This I did not know. ok, sorry Cruzer.

KtCallista wrote:really? This I did not know. ok, sorry Cruzer.

It's possibly because I never really cared that much about it so I didn't pay attention to it and so I never liked it.


So far I have managed to handle myself well enough with the education that I have retained.

cruzer wrote:It's possibly because I never really cared that much about it so I didn't pay attention to it and so I never liked it.


So far I have managed to handle myself well enough with the education that I have retained.

You appear to hide well enough online.

KtCallista wrote:You appear to hide well enough online.

He's not the only one. English classes are for suckers.

pooflady wrote:Then according to those rules, it should be Macy's' employees.

I disagree, because Macy's Inc. is derived from the original Macy's Federated Department Stores, Inc.)meanig it's already possessive Exchange department atores with employees and it remains possessive - it's the employees that are plural.

back from PM's farewell luncheon.

AZGman wrote:I disagree, because Macy's Inc. is derived from the original Macy's Federated Department Stores, Inc.)meanig it's already possessive Exchange department atores with employees and it remains possessive - it's the employees that are plural.

Has this dead horse been flogged enough yet??

AZGman wrote:Has this dead horse been flogged enough yet??

I can't squeeze any more blood out of this stone!