Why 'the Bank', why not just 'Bank'????

[kyser_soze]

AHEM!!

At last, one sane voice amongst a cacophony of imbeciles!!!!

*ahem*

I also hear some annoucers refer to it as 'The Bank'...but the train drivers and the automated announcements refer to it as 'Bank'

So you aren't loosing it mate.

 

[ATOMIC SUPLEX]

Why does earl's court get an apostrophe but barrons court not?

The tube is mental

 

[EastEnder]

*ahem*

I also hear some annoucers refer to it as 'The Bank'...but the train drivers and the automated announcements refer to it as 'Bank'

So you aren't loosing it mate.

Humble apologies, I should've realised I could count on you.

The rest of them need their ears syringed!!!

 

[kyser_soze]

STANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNerd

Just channeling my inner Stannerd seller there...

Earl's/Barons...possesion/plural. Clearly one court was owned by an Earl and one was some kind of meeting place for Barons...

 

[phildwyer]

Earl's/Barons...possesion/plural. Clearly one court was owned by an Earl and one was some kind of meeting place for Barons...

I think you'll find that the possessive plural takes the apostrophe. There is no doubt in my mind that London Transport have been highly remiss in this regard. They are lucky I am a busy man, otherwise I might well be tempted to take the matter further.

 

[kyser_soze]

Ahh, but what if Barons Court isn't the possesive, and simply a place where lots of Barons used to hang?

 

[squeegee]

I'd say you're spot on Kyser. Working as a sub-editor I always have to argue this point and often I get chief subs who still don't get it.

Having said that I've seen Earls Court on the Olympia website without '

 

[kyser_soze]

I'm more intrigued about the idea of these Barons hanging out further West...you reckon they got snubbed by the Earl?

As for the website...not really surpising is it? I've seen corporate websites for FTSE100 companies with GLARING typos like that...

 

[squeegee]

Just to labour the point


""Writers" isn't being used as a possessive -- the name isn't saying the guild belongs to the writers -- it's being used as an adjective. What type of guild is it? It's a writers guild. Similarly for "authors".
Consider some other examples. Dr. Seuss wrote books for children: childrens books. Those books may have also belonged to children, and thus been "children's books" as well. Likewise, Saddam Hussein kept childrens prisons -- the prisons didn't belong to the children, that's just who he kept there."

It's all in the intonation

But yeah them Earl's they always treated the baron's like shi'ite

 

[kyser_soze]

I now have an image of lots of little Barons in hats dancing and singing and quaffing ale and wenching in the Court.

In my mind they are having much fun, and thumbing their noses at the Earl.

 

[phildwyer]

Just to labour the point


""Writers" isn't being used as a possessive -- the name isn't saying the guild belongs to the writers -- it's being used as an adjective. What type of guild is it? It's a writers guild. Similarly for "authors".
Consider some other examples. Dr. Seuss wrote books for children: childrens books. Those books may have also belonged to children, and thus been "children's books" as well. Likewise, Saddam Hussein kept childrens prisons -- the prisons didn't belong to the children, that's just who he kept there.

The prisons were *for* the children. Therefore they were the prisons *of* the children. The children did not have to be the legal owners of the the prison in order for it to have been *their* prison. Therefore "childrens' prison" should take the possessive apostrophe. As should "Barons' Court." Except in that case the is even less doubt, because obviously the court *did* legally belong to the barons. You think a bunch of barons would need to go to someone else's court to hang out? Even if it was someone else's to begin with, the barons would immediately have nicked it.

 

[clandestino]

I think I've heard Bank called "the Bank" a few times, but much more common is Oval being called "the Oval".

 

[scifisam]

I heard ALL the time on the DLR. It's really annoying! Don't think I've ever noticed it on the tube, but it's standard on the DLR. It's like some ill-advised pedant told them to call it 'the Bank.' It's grammatically incorrent, because you don't put an article before place names. (Exceptions: plurals, acronyms, places with [whatever] of [whatever]. But not Bank).

 

[EastEnder]

I heard ALL the time on the DLR. It's really annoying! Don't think I've ever noticed it on the tube, but it's standard on the DLR. It's like some ill-advised pedant told them to call it 'the Bank.' It's grammatically incorrent, because you don't put an article before place names. (Exceptions: plurals, acronyms, places with [whatever] of [whatever]. But not Bank).

It seems to be a difficulty in coping with place names that are also nouns without preceding them with an article.

Although they don't seem very consistent - I've yet to hear references to 'the Temple' or 'the Embankment'....

All very odd.

 

[JHE]

I heard ALL the time on the DLR. It's really annoying! Don't think I've ever noticed it on the tube, but it's standard on the DLR. It's like some ill-advised pedant told them to call it 'the Bank.' It's grammatically incorrent, because you don't put an article before place names. (Exceptions: plurals, acronyms, places with [whatever] of [whatever]. But not Bank).

Yup, but there are other exceptions too: 'the United Kingdom', 'the Congo', 'the Maghreb', 'the Gambia' and others I can't think of at the mo'.

There's also a growing tendency now to omit the 'the' before 'UK' and 'US'. I don't mean when those terms are used adjectivally. (There's nothing wrong with, for example, 'They have US passports'.) I mean, for example, 'They now live in UK.' It sounds wrong to me.

 

[Maggot]

Never heard it called the Bank, but when a District Line announcer says Upminister it makes my blood boil.

 

[JHE]

Never heard it called the Bank, but when a District Line announcer says Upminister it makes my blood boil.

The one that really gets up my nose is the pronunciation of Plaistow as PLAY-stow, instead of PLAH-stow.

ETA: That's on the recorded announcements on the trains.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

Also, it's Ho-bern, not Hol-born. My great-aunt lived there for half a century and that's how she always said it.

 

[scifisam]

Yup, but there are other exceptions too: 'the United Kingdom', 'the Congo', 'the Maghreb', 'the Gambia' and others I can't think of at the mo'.

There's also a growing tendency now to omit the 'the' before 'UK' and 'US'. I don't mean when those terms are used adjectivally. (There's nothing wrong with, for exapmple, 'They have US passports'.) I mean, for example, 'They now live in UK.' It sounds wrong to me.

People say that all country names with 'Unted' in take the definite plural, but more simply put, it's because 'United' countries tend to either be plural (States, Emirates), or have 'of' in the full title: The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. It's not an exception - it's part of a grammatical rule.

The Gambia is also, officially, the Republic of the Gambia. I have no idea aboput Maghreb, except that I've only heard it called Maghreb without 'the.'

 

[JHE]

Also, it's Ho-bern, not Hol-born.

Quite right - though the initial 'H'-sound is optional. OWE-bun is fine. The 'l' is there just to confuse tourists.

 

[cybertect]

The Strand?

 

[JHE]

People say that all country names with 'Unted' in take the definite plural, but more simply put, it's because 'United' countries tend to either be plural (States, Emirates), or have 'of' in the full title: The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. It's not an exception - it's part of a grammatical rule.

Indeed there are rules to these things - and some of them are very specific. Some of the rules describe sets of exceptions to the more general rule - as you know: you described some of the rules as 'exceptions'.

The Gambia is also, officially, the Republic of the Gambia. I have no idea aboput Maghreb, except that I've only heard it called Maghreb without 'the.'

I don't think I've ever heard 'Maghreb' without the article.

It's the Kingdom of Spain, but we never say 'the Spain'.

It's the French Republic, but not 'the France'.

If you are right that it is 'the Republic of the Gambia', it is the second 'the' which is curious.

 

[cybertect]

http://www.gambia.gm/

"Republic of The Gambia Official Website"

 

[spanglechick]

Just to labour the point


""Writers" isn't being used as a possessive -- the name isn't saying the guild belongs to the writers -- it's being used as an adjective. What type of guild is it? It's a writers guild. Similarly for "authors".

um no. ok the way to test this is to take a word that changes completely in the plural. Child/children would be a good example but you've confused that elsewhere so let's use "people".

One writer, many writers.

One person, many people.

You would not say "The People Guild." Meaning the guild made up of people. Well you might, but it'd be odd. Like saying "The women Institute". It's the Institute made up of women, or the Guild made up of people. It requires a possessive apostrophe to show this.
Now if we revert to words which take an "s" to show plurality (writer/s, author/s), we need to add the "s" because there are many writers or authors - which you agree with. But just as you can't have "the people guild" or "the women institute", you can't just leave it in its plural state; you need to show possession. Hence "The writers' guild".

Now then... next?

Consider some other examples. Dr. Seuss wrote books for children: childrens books. Those books may have also belonged to children, and thus been "children's books" as well. Likewise, Saddam Hussein kept childrens prisons -- the prisons didn't belong to the children, that's just who he kept there."

It's all in the intonation

Now you are becoming very muddled. The plural of child is children. There is absolutely no usage in the English language of "childrens". If we follow your assertion that the prisons and the books do not take the possessive apostrophe because there was no actual ownership, it would automatically become "Dr Seuss wrote children books" or "Hussein had children prisons". Children is already plural - it does not exist as "childrens".

It's absolutely nothing to do with intonation, and possessive apostrophes aren't always to do with ownership.

 

[cybertect]

Though their US Embassy has "The Republic of The Gambia"

 

[scifisam]

The prisons were *for* the children. Therefore they were the prisons *of* the children. The children did not have to be the legal owners of the the prison in order for it to have been *their* prison. Therefore "childrens' prison" should take the possessive apostrophe. As should "Barons' Court." Except in that case the is even less doubt, because obviously the court *did* legally belong to the barons. You think a bunch of barons would need to go to someone else's court to hang out? Even if it was someone else's to begin with, the barons would immediately have nicked it.

I would say Writers' Guild and Children's Books/Prisons too. Same as I would say Children's Clothes, even if they haven't bought them yet, but are just looking around the children's clothes dept. in a shop.

 

[JHE]

http://www.gambia.gm/

"Republic of The Gambia Official Website"

And they use 'the Gambia'. I wonder if 'Gambia' is in fact plural in whatever language it comes from.

 

[spanglechick]

I would say Writers' Guild and Children's Books/Prisons too. Same as I would say Children's Clothes, even if they haven't bought them yet, but are just looking around the children's clothes dept. in a shop.

And you'd be right ^^^

 

[cybertect]

Best explanation of the origin and use of the apostrophe I've found

http://www.pcrrn.co.uk/apostrophe/page3.htm

English is a Germanic language. It shares much in common with modern German, although much vocabulary was later imported from French/Latin. Quick example: the German for foot is Fuss, for ball is Ball, so football is Fussball. We get the word pedestrian from the French/Latin side though. Some Germanic usage survives in English, particularly in North American English where some archaic forms remain in use - gotten for instance. The -en participle ending will be familiar to German speakers.

Like modern German, old forms of English used a genitive case ending to show possession. This is normally -es. For our purposes, that will do. For example, the English The man's coat in German is Der Mantel des Mannes (The coat of the man). Note the -es ending on Mann to show possession.

So now let's (let us) go back a few hundred years in English. Geoffrey Chaucer wrote his famous Canterbury Tales in the English of his time. What today we call the Knight's Tale he wrote as Knyghtes Tale. He also writes about the Kynges court and Goddes love. But in modern English, of all varieties, the "e" is missing. Coupled with modern spelling, Kynges court becomes King's court and Goddes love becomes God's love. The old -es possessive form in English is now missing, and as I am sure you will now remember we use an apostrophe when letters are missing.

so childrenes toys -> children's toys

 

[scifisam]

Indeed there are rules to these things - and some of them are very specific. Some of the rules describe sets of exceptions to the more general rule - as you know: you described some of the rules as 'exceptions'.

I don't think I've ever heard 'Maghreb' without the article.

It's the Kingdom of Spain, but we never say 'the Spain'.

It's the French Republic, but not 'the France'.

If you are right that it is 'the Republic of the Gambia', it is the second 'the' which is curious.

Spain and France both existed as entities before they were ever called Kingdoms or Republics - maybe that explains it. I honestly have no idea about (the)Maghreb, so can't put forward any opinion on that.

I'm not going to get into an argument over this, anyway. Either there is a rule for all these 'exceptions,' or they are exceptions which all happen to follow the same pattern. It turns out the same either way, especially for people learning to speak English.

In any case, Bank is Bank, not the Bank. (Strand/the Strand is a good example of a real 'exception,' though).