Watchers' Council, definitely, because it's a simple plural possessive.
Lovers' Walk would be correct if you're describing it, but if the place actually has been officially named Lovers Walk then that takes precedence, much like the Australian words "labour" and "harbour" are spelt differently as part of "Labor Party" and "Victor Harbor".
I go with eowyn_315's reasoning for saying "pig's blood", but "pigs' blood" may also be acceptable. I think "pigs blood" looks silly and wrong, but rather than choose any of the three I'd be just as inclined to write "pig blood" and avoid the whole tangled mess.
Would it? Not disputing, just wondering how that works, grammatically. I'd have thought "a Council composed of Watchers", if it wasn't "Watchers' Council", would be "Watcher Council".
Yes, I know it's the name of an episode, but whether the episode name is grammatically correct depends on whether it's named after a place with that official name, a place with that unofficial name, or named as a description of what happens in that episode. If A, then the apostrophe goes wherever it goes in the official place name; if B, then the apostrophe follows the S as it's a plural possessive; if C, there's no apostrophe as it's a simple plural.
Yeah, apparently. It's the same logic behind "boys school" and "girls toilet" (although... the toilet isn't composed of girls, so... *needs to check my books again*). Both are acceptable.
On the other hand, you can't say "mens toilet", because that would translate as "a toilet for mens" and that's nonsensical. It only works if the word not being apostrophised is an actual word (like "boys", "Watchers", etc).
Mmmkay. See, I'd have said "boys' school" and "girls' toilet" there too. Acceptable or no, the apostropheless form certainly stands out to me as strange. (And yes, "mens toilet" or indeed "mens' toilet" are nonsensical — "men's" is the obviously correct form.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
deird_lj
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-06-03 05:12 am (UTC)Lovers' Walk would be correct if you're describing it, but if the place actually has been officially named Lovers Walk then that takes precedence, much like the Australian words "labour" and "harbour" are spelt differently as part of "Labor Party" and "Victor Harbor".
I go with eowyn_315's reasoning for saying "pig's blood", but "pigs' blood" may also be acceptable. I think "pigs blood" looks silly and wrong, but rather than choose any of the three I'd be just as inclined to write "pig blood" and avoid the whole tangled mess.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-03 05:14 am (UTC)You're aware "Lovers Walk" is the name of an episode rather than a place, right?
no subject
Date: 2010-06-04 03:57 am (UTC)Yes, I know it's the name of an episode, but whether the episode name is grammatically correct depends on whether it's named after a place with that official name, a place with that unofficial name, or named as a description of what happens in that episode. If A, then the apostrophe goes wherever it goes in the official place name; if B, then the apostrophe follows the S as it's a plural possessive; if C, there's no apostrophe as it's a simple plural.
no subject
Date: 2010-06-04 04:05 am (UTC)On the other hand, you can't say "mens toilet", because that would translate as "a toilet for mens" and that's nonsensical. It only works if the word not being apostrophised is an actual word (like "boys", "Watchers", etc).
no subject
Date: 2010-06-04 01:38 pm (UTC)