So I was taught that I should use apostrophes when something possesses something else, but I'm not sure about the use of it's in the following situation:     ...and they found their way to a castle.  It's walls were made of pure gold.     My question is, should I use It's because the apostrophe means that the castle has possession of the wall, or should I not because it's is generally understood to be a concatenation of "it is"?  Or perhaps I should use Its' walls?
74485
Probably one of the most frequent grammar mistakes in the English language is:     The dog sat on it's mat.   Since spelling checkers don't catch it, and it is even logical, since you would correctly write:     The dog sat on Fluffy's mat.   What is the best way to explain to a learner of English how to choose between it's and its?
8437
What is the possessive of a noun ending in ‑s?  Are these both right, or is the second one wrong?   the boys' books the boss' car
82845
Possible Duplicate:             I just bought The Elements of Style, an awesome little book. However, in the first section, the authors promote the use of 's, no matter what the last letter of a word is, to show possessiveness.  Some examples they use:        Charles's friend     Burns's poems      Are these grammatically correct?
83391
If I was to label something      The Poets and Painters' Distillery    do I only apply the possessive apostrophe after 'Painters' as in the text written above, or do I also need to apply one to 'Poets' so that it becomes      The Poets' and Painters' Distillery ?    I'm thinking the former is correct, but cannot be too sure.
40153
I've always been confused by the differences in behavior of font commands.  For example, we have \mathrm{} and \texttt{}, which can be used like this: \texttt{hello} world.  And then we have \it and \bf which must be used as {\it hello} world. If one uses \it{hello} world, both words are italicized.  Internally, what is the difference here? And was this difference a conscious design decision? If so, why?
19803
Does it indicate a possessive adjective or just a plural noun? If noun, why it is not CPUs (without apostrophe)?
100966
In the phrase beginners guide to …,  where should the apostrophe go?   Beginner’s Guide to […] Beginners’ Guide to […]   In my particular case, this is the title for a presentation so there are multiple beginners that are being addressed.
90555
I know that if a word ends with an s then it should be made plural or possessive by use of an apostrophe with no extra s (e.g. "Thomas Harris' book was a riveting read." as opposed to "Gary Barlow's voice is so distracting.")  What about if the word ends with a z. For example, would it be Gomez' album or Gomez's album?
62531
In a recent Financial Times article (Yemen PM Escapes Assissnation), the apostrophe necessary to show possession was left out. I've seen colleagues do it as well. Isn't it supposed to be "Yemen's PM Escapes...?" Other times I've seen people write "Japan Minister of Finance tackles deflation..." or "India VP resigns..." I have noticed that in most of these cases, the omission of the apostrophe was right before a captilazed appellation (president, country, municipal, etc.) What's going on? Firm grammar rules stipulate that there be an apostrophe, yet there isn't one. If the FT does it, then there must be an exception (in journalism?) that I'm unaware of. Must there or must there not be an apostrophe?
122780
OK, this question has been asked over and over, and I am still unsure. I am just trying to find the thin line between a substantial and minor edit.  I find myself making edits for grammar and poor formatting, that I can see some reviewers find minor and others do not.  I have also noticed some users with high rep, or moderators will make the similar edits:     If I have edited your post with an edit summary of “ARGH”... ... or   some variation thereof, then you probably used “it’s” when the correct   word was, in fact, “its”.   Can anyone provide a definitive way to establish whether or not one should proceed to edit? It seems to be more a matter of opinion rather than an objective delineation.
63742
With a name that ends in -s, such as Travis or Lewis, where and when should you use -es, -'s, -s or just leave it alone to both pluralise, and to infer belonging to?  E.g., if the ball belongs to Travis, which suffix would be used in      The ball is Travis[es/'s/s/].   And, referring to a group of people all named Travis, which is correct:     Here come the Travis[es/'s/s/].
23311
When dealing with abbreviations, should you parenthesize the abbreviation or its expansion? I have seen it both ways. Can anyone make a good case for preferring one style over the other?
33500
When expanding an abbreviation in parentheses, sometimes the thing that was abbreviate was used in a possessive context.  Consider the following example:     If the Giant Ostrich Bomb's (GOB) fuse is too short, you may be too close when it goes off and you may get kicked in the face.   Is the above correct, or should it be rewritten this way instead:     If the Giant Ostrich Bomb (GOB)'s fuse is too short, you may be too close when it goes off and you may get kicked in the face.   If this is a matter of style, do any of the popular style manuals have a recommendation?
51807
Sometimes when I write, for example, "the boundaries of segments", I am suggested to use "segments' boundaries" or even "segment boundaries".   Or "the page's content" vs. "the content of the page" vs. "the page content". Then I would like to know is it always preferred to use phrases with apostrophe or adjective?  For example      In our terms, they are mainly textual elements within the page content, which serve as the starting point  of a data region (or a data region's starting point ?)  or a distinctive feature within it
52580
While I know technically the English language has a distinction because when there's a conflict between the possessive form and a contraction, the contraction wins. That is:   Its is the possessive form of it—and this will presumably be followed by some form of noun spec or something. It's is short for "it is" or "it has" (as in "it's been years since...").   The rule of thumb I use to remember this is that it follows the same pattern as whose and who's, for which the correct use is much more obvious.  While technically I see why there's (ha ha) a distinction, I can't think of any case why it really needs to be there, because for every use of either construct, the meaning intended is usually (if not always) obvious from context. Case in point: many questions and answers written on the Stack Exchange network are written incorrectly, yet nobody notices or cares. (Usually in my case, I default to "it's" then realize I screwed up)  As a single word, I could see why it'd be ambiguous, but I don't see why in typical prose it would matter.  Is there a specific reason for this in earlier dialects of English, or specific cases where choosing the incorrect form leads to lack of understanding of a particular sentence?
78149
In a recent thread, it was recommended that Academies' Trust be written as I just have done:      Academies' Trust. Normal possessive apostrophe rules apply.   If I accept this traditional style, I might well end up writing something like:     Academies' Trusts include the Academies Enterprise Trust, the Leigh   Academies Trust, the Aspirations Academies Trust, and The Kemnal   Academies Trust.   Should consistency of style override traditional apostrophe rules in this case?
89355
I've been confused about this as long as I can remember. Should it be:     One should do ones duty.   or     One should do one's duty.   I'm guessing it should be the latter. But that doesn't sit well with the possessive pronoun 'its'. For example:     It is its own purpose.   vs.     It is it's own purpose.   Here, the former seems clearly correct.