How to read "my boss' kid"?

Question

How to read "my boss' kid"? Do you read as 'my boss kid' or 'my bosses kid'?

Usenet · Accepted Answer

[nq:1]How to read "my boss' kid"? Do you read as 'my boss kid' or 'my bosses kid'?[/nq]
I'd be inclined not to read it at all as it's missing an s: My boss's kid.

David
==

Usenet · Answer

"Nick":
[nq:2]How to read "my boss' kid"? Do you read as 'my boss kid' or 'my bosses kid'?[/nq]
Both pronunciations are used, but the second one is more understandable and I strongly prefer and recommend it.
"David":
[nq:1]I'd be inclined not to read it at all as it's missing an s: My boss's kid.[/nq]
No, both spellings are used. But the second one is more logical, and I strongly prefer and recommend it.

Mark Brader, Toronto > "Anyone who can handle a needle convincingly can make (Email Removed) > us see a thread which is not there." E.H. Gombrich

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]"Nick": Both pronunciations are used, but the second one is more understandable and I strongly prefer and recommend it.[/nq]
No-one in their right mind would talk about their "boss kid" if they meant their boss's kid.
[nq:1]"David":[/nq]
[nq:2]I'd be inclined not to read it at all as it's missing an s: My boss's kid.[/nq]
[nq:1]No, both spellings are used. But the second one is more logical, and I strongly prefer and recommend it.[/nq]
David's right: the "s" is only omitted if it is not pronounced.

Adrian

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]How to read "my boss' kid"? Do you read as 'my boss kid' or 'my bosses kid'?[/nq]
More likely "my boss's kid".
Steve Hayes
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]David's right: the "s" is only omitted if it is not pronounced.[/nq]
That would make sense, but some people aren't very sensible. I think there are a lot of people who write "boss'" but say /bOs@z/.

As to advice, for once I agree with the style books: write 's, and pronounce it, for the possessive of all singular nouns (with a few exceptions).

Joe Fineman (Email Removed)

Usenet · Answer

Nick:
[nq:2]How to read "my boss' kid"? Do you read as 'my boss kid' or 'my bosses kid'?[/nq]
[nq:1]I'd be inclined not to read it at all as it's missing an s: My boss's kid.[/nq]
Ignore the *****, Nick. People here aren't actually here to help anyone; they're just here to throw insults at each other. This is arguably the most off-topic message board/newsgroup/chatroom/website/whatever I've ever come across on the net, and likewise it's full of people who don't know (or care) all that much about English.
"My boss' kid", when pronounced, sounds like "my bosses kid", if that's what you mean. But, "my boss' kid" MEANS "the kid of my boss (singular)". The only time "my bosses' kid" would be appropriate is when you have two bosses (because it's plural) who have a kid together.
BTW, David doesn't know what he's talking about. You don't need to write it as "boss's", at least if you're younger than, say, 300.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]Nick:[/nq]
[nq:2]I'd be inclined not to read it at all as it's missing an s: My boss's kid.[/nq]
[nq:1]Ignore the *****, Nick.[/nq]
I take it that you disagree with some posts?
[nq:1]People here aren't actually here to help anyone; they're just here to throw insults at each other.[/nq]
Lie.
[nq:1]This is arguably the most off-topic message board/newsgroup/chatroom/website/whatever I've ever come across on the net,[/nq]
Your point being?
[nq:1]and likewise it's full of people who don't know (or care) all that much about English.[/nq]
Yeah, right. Thanks for the rant, DE.
[nq:1]"My boss' kid", when pronounced, sounds like "my bosses kid", if that'swhat you mean.[/nq]
Nope.
[nq:1]But, "my boss' kid" MEANS "the kid of my boss (singular)".[/nq]
Correct.
[nq:1]The only time "my bosses' kid" would be appropriate is when you have two bosses(because it's plural) who have a kid together.[/nq]
Correct.
[nq:1]BTW, David doesn't know what he's talking about. You don't need to writeit as "boss's", at least if you're younger than, say, 300.[/nq]
Wrong. If you pronounce it "boss's", you write it "boss's". Simple.

Adrian

Usenet · Answer

I have to disagree. I don't care for it, myself, but I have no doubt that is intended to be read with four syllables. You can see it often used, for example, in closed captioning of television programs in the US. A character onscreen will say "the boss's order," pronouncing "boss's" in two syllables, or "the witness's statement," pronouncing "witness's" in three syllables," but the closed captioning will render them as and .
The original poster, after all, asked how was to be pronounced, and the answer is that it is to be pronounced just the same as . If he had asked how to write the item in question, I would advise him to write .
[nq:2]BTW, David doesn't know what he's talking about. You don't need towrite[/nq]
[nq:1]it as[/nq]
[nq:2]"boss's", at least if you're younger than, say, 300.[/nq]
[nq:1]Wrong. If you pronounce it "boss's", you write it "boss's". Simple.[/nq]
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]what Nope.[/nq]
[nq:1]I have to disagree. I don't care for it, myself, but I have no doubt that is ... pronouncing "witness's" in three syllables," but the closed captioning will render them as and .[/nq]
Always? Are the subtitlers employing some non-rule?
[nq:1]The original poster, after all, asked how was to be pronounced, and the answer is that it is to be pronounced just the same as .[/nq]
But why should that conclusion be drawn? If I read "Mr Jones' house", I should be able to infer that the author is pronouncing "Jones'" as one syllable. Otherwise, what is the point exactly in having the option of adding an s?
Adrian

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]that's[/nq]
Because it's a matter of the written language, I have always assumed that the captioners are following an explicit rule. In fact, in a post to alt.english.usage a couple of years ago, I reported having read just such a rule:
See
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=47dd044c.0201230002.a60e20d%40posting.google.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain

or
http://tinyurl.com/22xue
(begin quote from Usenet post)
I have read of a rule where a modern name ending with becomes a possessive by adding an apostrophe and no , but the result is pronounced by adding an extra /s/, /@s/, or /@z/ to the name. I don't believe the people who hold to this rule use it in the case of ancient names such as those I gave above, and in any case, it seems a bizarre rule to me. However, it appears to still be in use, because the other day when I saw Ken Burns's documentary about Mark Twain, the narrator made reference to /'hEnrI 'klEm@ns@z dET/, but the Closed Captioning read "Henry Clemens' death." I would have pronounced it as the narrator did, but written it "Henry Clemens's death."

(end quote from Usenet post)
[nq:2]The original poster, after all, asked how ... is to be pronounced just the sameas .[/nq]
[nq:1]But why should that conclusion be drawn? If I read "Mr Jones' house", I should be able to infer that the author is pronouncing "Jones'" as one syllable. Otherwise, what is the point exactly in having the option of adding an s?[/nq]
It would be useful if you could infer that the author is pronouncing as one syllable. However, the reality of the matter is that you cannot. Today while reading in a local paper an article about rationing in American medicine, I came across the following phrase: This reminded me that the rule in question does not seem to apply to names. If someone writes I don't really know if the author intended for to be read in one syllable or two. By the same token, I don't know if is intended to be read as one syllable or two.
And I gave the example in my post of being used to represent a pronunciation in which is pronounced in three syllables. I think the following indicates that it could also be pronounced in two syllables:
From The American Heritage Book of English Usage at http://www.bartleby.com/64/82.html
(quote I have not corrected their italics)
Note that although some people use just the apostrophe after singular nouns ending in s (the witness' testimony, Burns' poetry ), the -'s is generally preferred because it more accurately reflects the modern pronunciation of these forms. However, in a few cases where the -'s is not pronounced, it is usual to add just the apostrophe: for righteousness' (appearance') sake.
(end quote)
I have not, as yet, encountered anyone who pronounced the possessive of in less than two syllables. So to answer the original poster's question, I am quite certain that is to be read with pronounced in two syllables, but no one can have the same certainly about many other possessive forms of nouns ending in .

Note that this situation would cause ambiguity even for someone reading *my* writing, if they were not already familiar with it! If I were to write , I would do so with the intention that be pronounced as one syllable (and I would do so only when representing the speech of someone who would make a one-syllable possessive based upon the name . I prefer myself see my reference above to . But a reader unfamiliar with my opinion on such matters simply could not be certain whether I intended to be pronounced with one syllable or two.

Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com

How to read "my boss' kid"?

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions