Noun plurals and apostrophes

[Brian G Turner]

Yep, that's what I've got to go with, Hex.

 

[Erin99]

I've been thinking about this since my last post, even discussing it with Seph (I know, I know, I need to get out more!), and it could be argued that if the guards were there to protect all past and future emperors, being above one individual and, in a way, above the emperor too, and they had ranks and regiments named after popular emperors, perhaps they could be without the apostrophe. You'd have to make it clear, though, as Hex says. And then we'll believe anything, cos it's your world.

(I think that's a different point from Gumboot's, although it amounts to the same thing I suppose.)

 

[Sander]

Another random point: sports teams tend to work in a similar way. That is, we say "The Giants offense" or "the Giants linebackers", rather than using the possessive. At least, that's what the AP stylebook says.

But Emperors Guard still looks wrong, so I'm with Hex.

 

[HareBrain]

Another random point: sports teams tend to work in a similar way. That is, we say "The Giants offense" or "the Giants linebackers", rather than using the possessive. At least, that's what the AP stylebook says.

That's quite a bit different, I think. The offense is a subdivision of the Giants. It's like saying "The 12th Division armour" or "the company marketing department". (The fact that "Giants" ends in an "s" is coincidence and has nothing to do with possession.) Whereas the guard isn't part of the emperor.

 

[Gumboot]

For me, the issue is that to get away with Emperors Guard you need to have a section explaining how your Emperors Guard is a bit strangely named because though you'd think they were the Emperor's Guard, or the Guard of the Emperor (whether or not they strictly belonged to him), in fact they're not, but a separately named group.

And if it's not possessive, then why is there an s?

Anyway, to get to my point (eventually): it looks wrong, even if there are ways to argue that it's not.

The only reason it looks wrong is because in our culture we have a tradition of military units being owned by people (this probably dates back to mercenary companies of the Middle Ages). In fact the tradition is so strong we name military units as belonging to individual people even when they don't.

Roman Legions, as an example, did not follow this tradition; for example Legio XVI Flavia Firma is the equivalent of "Emperors Guard" in grammatical construction; "Flavia" being a non-possessive plural.

If you like, think of it as "Emperors" Guard, where "Emperors" denotes a title; perhaps an honorary bestowed upon the unit for some act of bravery.

 

[Gumboot]

I've been thinking about this since my last post, even discussing it with Seph (I know, I know, I need to get out more!), and it could be argued that if the guards were there to protect all past and future emperors, being above one individual and, in a way, above the emperor too, and they had ranks and regiments named after popular emperors, perhaps they could be without the apostrophe. You'd have to make it clear, though, as Hex says. And then we'll believe anything, cos it's your world.

(I think that's a different point from Gumboot's, although it amounts to the same thing I suppose.)

Yeah I think we're saying pretty much the same thing. The real question comes down to "Why are they called "Emperors"?". How they gained that title is pretty important. If it's simply because they guard the Emperor, you probably can't avoid the possessive. If it's some other reason; such as an honorary title or a nickname that became official, you don't necessarily need it. One way of distancing yourself from the possessive could be if people colloquially referred to the unit as "The Emperors".

Maybe the fact they're called "Emperors" and the fact they guard the Emperor are coincidence. Maybe there were multiple guard units, all with different titles, by for whatever reason they're the only one left.

I can think of a number of different reasons, but I think the main point is, and here I think I'm in agreement with Hex, there needs to be a reason.