Sentence differences

The first two sentences are both correctly formed, but I think the more common would be the first.
I can't make sense of the second sentence in the second pair.

Thank you. I also thought that the first sounded better. But do they basically mean the same, in that the addition of 's to position does not alter the meaning. So is there no difference in the meaning of the sentences with the use of position and positions in the first pair?

For the second pair, I also think that the second one does not sound right.

I don't see 's in the original. I think your question has been answered.

I meant the use of (s). I just wanted to know if both of the sentences mean the same:

The position of your legs is important.
The positions of your legs are important.

So the use of 'position and is' or 'positions and are' would ultimately lead to the same meaning in that sentence. There is no difference in meaning, specifically since I am saying your 'legs' (plural), it does

AnonymousThere is no difference in meaning,

Any difference in meaning is irrelevant, because the one sentence would never be used.

Yes, I would like to know if there is any difference in meaning? Do they mean the same?

What do you mean by 'the one sentence would never be used'? What is the one sentence?

AnonymousWhat do you mean by 'the one sentence would never be used'? What is the one sentence?

The sentence that I mentioned in my first response to you: The positions of your legs are important.

Aha, I see. But it is correctly formulated, but not commonly used as you said. Right?

AnonymousDo these sentence mean the same in terms of the tenses used? I feel that the use of 's in positions changes the meaning.

You're using the word "tense" incorrectly. Tense has to do with the timing of the action of a verb, not the singular or plural status of a noun.