Cogitating on grammar
Howard posts an e-mail from a Federal judge who says that the use of the possessive in the previous example is not only proper but demanded by the rules of grammar, as an "idiomatic possessive".
Received an email from Fifth Circuit Judge Jerry E. Smith this morning entitled "Units of time or value and the genitive possessive." The email states:
Getting this one wrong is as bad as splitting an infinitive. There should be no legitimate split of authority on this plain rule of grammar (as there is, for example, on whether "none" is singular or plural). "The idiomatic possessive should be used with periods of time and statements of worth." [example given: "six months' confinement"] -- Bryan A. Garner, A Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage 674 (Oxford 2d ed. 1995)
Much as I hestitate to diagree with a Federal judge, the phrase itself belies the suggestion that there can be "no legitimate split of authority" on this point, or that it involves a "plain rule of grammar". The term "idiomatic" conveys the sense that this is an irregular or non-standard usage. An idiom is defined as "an expression sanctioned by usage, having a sense peculiar to itself and not agreeing with the logical sense of its structural form". Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.
I will stand corrected in my position that the possessive is not accepted, but I won't accept the suggestion that the use of this or any other idiomatic phrase should be considered as the only proper usage.
2:24:59 PM 
|
