Son of return of the wandering apostrophe, part 486

I spotted a sign down Wellington’s Lambton Quay last week that I just had to photograph and share. In four lines it had not one but three epic fail apostrophe errors. Three.

And the winner of the Egregious Random Apostrophe Award 2013 is...
And the winner of the Egregious Random Apostrophe Award 2013 is…

The thing is, this wasn’t a cheap sign. Not by any stretch. And now, someone’s going to have to pay again, to get it fixed…maybe.

What gets me are the number of signs that end up this way. A friend of mine calls them ‘dyspostrophes’. Apt.

Copyright © Matthew Wright 2013


7 thoughts on “Son of return of the wandering apostrophe, part 486

  1. I note that The Razors Edge and Hunters for Hair both don’t use the apostrophe in their official business names. So not entirely the signwriter’s fault – though the top line certainly is!

  2. Though I do like the mental image Hunters for Hair conjures up. After all, there once were fur-trappers, so why not hair-hunters?

  3. While I was still teaching English I often told my students one of the things that makes (written) English hard is that there are very few absolute rules. The rule for possessive nouns is one of the few rules without a list of exceptions, yet it’s one of the most-broken rules out there. Thanks to years of grading high school English essays I can no longer laugh at things like this.

    1. The irony is that the rules for possessive nouns, plural possessives, all with or without s-endings and so forth are actually very straight-forward and, as you say, actually taught! Yet still people trip. Sometimes with monstrous effect. There was once a menu board in a local bar here in Wellington where every single word with an s- ending was dealt to – “egg’s”, “sausage’s” and so forth. Ouch.Since painted over, mercifully.

Comments are closed.