Grammar - Which is Correct?

The bank requires Janet and John's signatures .....

or

The bank requires Janet's and John's signatures .....

I tried the old turn it around rule, eg the signatures of Janet and John ..... but that doesn't answer my question. It only lets me know that the apostrophe goes before the s, which I knew anyway.

Comments please, oh great knnowlegeable people. Thanks.

Gidday

The bank requires the signatures of Janet and John.

How about 'the bank requires both Janet's and John's signatures'?

A cop out, I know

If "Janet and John" is a single item, then the first is correct, but if the bank requires both signatures, then the second is the one to use.

On second thoughts, the word Signatures is plural, so it implies more than one. Since each person has only one signature, the second must be correct.

(I was a grammar nazi in a previous life!)

use legal terminolagy... "The bank requires the signatures of both contracting parties, Being Janet Doe and John Doe."

Also don't you only use an apostrophe when replacing a missing letter or letters?
Eg the signature belongs to Janet (Janets) therefore there's no apostrophe, rather than Janet is (Janet's). Or is it that the apostrophe comes after the s (Janets') i can't remember :confused:

devan;276960 wrote: Also don't you only use an apostrophe when replacing a missing letter or letters?
Eg the signature belongs to Janet (Janets) therefore there's no apostrophe, rather than Janet is (Janet's). Or is it that the apostrophe comes after the s (Janets') i can't remember :confused:

Nah, possessive also - belonging to, as in Tigger's ball []

I would go for 'Janet's and John's signatures' if they are wanting both Janet and John to sign. 'Janet and John's signature' implies to me that the two of them only have one combined signature between them!

I would say Janet's and John's signatures. You want Janet's signature, not Janet signature, eh?

devan - that only applies with 'its'. It's a nice day, and your enjoying its warmth. Otherwise, the day's long and your enjoying the day's length. The apostrophe comes after the 's' if there is more than one. So the cow's tail was swishing, but the cows' tails were swishing. Clear as mud?

Thanks. I went for the second one. Had to send the letter overnight.

Devan - yes, apostrophe is used when something is missing, eg there's = there is (hardly anybody says there are when it's plural these days, they just say there's), it's = it is.

Girls ball - how do you know if one or more girls own the ball? If it is girl's ball then it is only one girl (the ball of the girl). If it is the girls' ball then it is more than one girl (the ball of the girls). You wouldn't have Janets' ball - you're unlikely to have more than one Janet.

Thanks again.

PS - Just received a letter from lawyer referring to my mothers (no apostrophe)estate in the heading and throughout the letter.

Perhaps I have more than one mother! It should be mother's estate (estate of my mother).

Toast;276965 wrote: Perhaps I have more than one mother!

Then it would be mothers' estate []

Toast;276965 wrote: PS - Just received a letter from lawyer referring to my mothers (no apostrophe)estate in the heading and throughout the letter.

Perhaps I have more than one mother! It should be mother's estate (estate of my mother).

I hate it when lawyers and/or their staff do NOT proof read (or actually know proper grammar and punctuation). It totally blows me away, the number of run-on sentences that lawyers let leave their office.

Diane

I hate it when people write "sort after" the don't mean sorting.. they mean 'sought after'. I see it all the time in real-estate advertising but also recently saw it in a published advert from a company that should have known better. People really think the correct word is 'sort'!!

NZ Appaloosas;276988 wrote: I hate it when lawyers and/or their staff do NOT proof read (or actually know proper grammar and punctuation). It totally blows me away, the number of run-on sentences that lawyers let leave their office.

Diane

It amazes me how many professionals are now increasingly ignorant of correct grammar, punctuation and spelling. Engineers, surveyors, accountants and even occasionally lawyers that don't know the difference between there/their/they're, were/where/we're and inquiry/enquiry are the ones that come to mind. Are we seeing the start of the results of modern education practices as barely comprehensible people who play a big part in running our lives? [:0]

There's a huge difference in legal meaning between "properties", "property's", or "properties'", for example, and I definitely wouldn't be happy paying for the fallout of a professional acting for me if he or she didn't know the implications of a misplaced apostrophe [!]

Gidday

I still reckon I am right.