What's the correct way to write this: 1. Amos’ face was covered in blood. 2. Amos’s face was covered in blood. I'm not so crazy about either one. I've only shown the relevant part of the sentence though, not the whole thing. ***Oops, I should have posted this in spelling, punctuation, and grammar.
Avoid, avoid, avoid giving any of your characters a name ending in 's'. It will drive you and the reader crazy after a while. The more common punctuation is becoming Amos's in American English, I've noticed (yum! a real plethora of 's's if you use a surname like 'Stephens'), but in British English (at the moment) Amos' is used more frequently. Just keep away from the problem and make your life easier. If it's unavoidable, be consistent.
Very good point. I will consider changing the name, or maybe changing the sentence around. The character only makes a couple of appearances.
This thread has an good discussion at its end demonstrating when both can be correct. https://www.writingforums.org/showthread.php?t=6265&highlight=apostrophe
AFAIK, Amos's is correct, how unnatural it may seem. I believe the plural possessive ending on an "s" goes with the comma, such as in: the houses' chimneys or the ships' anchors
Well, been thinking a bit more, and found this very name in my notes: 'I liked the Elvis' costumes' -- I am admiring the costumes of a group of Elvis lookalikes, and 'I liked Elvis's costume' -- I liked the costume worn by Elvis. Elvis' = plural noun (I suppose you could also have 'Elvises', but word seems to morph out of recognition) Elvis's = singular noun *phew* I knew this issue had caused problems in the past. I'd still go with the s' and not s's every time, even for singular nouns. I guess it's partly a matter of style?
what's wrong with just 'his'?... or 'the man's/boy's/whatever's? any alternative would be better, imo...
