Talk:Hundred Years War

From Citizendium
Revision as of 14:35, 4 June 2009 by imported>James F. Perry (→‎Apostrophe: counter-example)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This article is developing and not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition Lengthy, intermittent warfare between English and French forces over feudal territorial rights and succession to the French crown. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category History [Categories OK]
 Talk Archive none  English language variant British English

Apostrophe

What do you reckon about use of an apostrophe in the title of this article? I expected Hundred Years' War but did find that most books listed on Amazon UK omit it, and publishers' notes seem to specify that no apostrophe should be used (e.g. Blackwell). However, I think the apostrophe is technically correct: cf. a few minutes' wait or three weeks' notice. John Stephenson 05:33, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

In the phrase a few minutes' wait, we are specifying the duration of the waiting period (a wait of two minutes duration, in effect). However, with the Hundred Years War, the phrase is not so much specifying the duration of the War (though that was its approximate duration) as the name of the war. Apart from that, the non-use of the apostrophe seems to be the norm (in books, for example). James F. Perry 20:24, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Trying to come up with another example: there is the Persian Gulf War which would never be called the Persian Gulf's War. Or the Battle of Gettysburg which would likewise never be called Gettysburg's Battle (though some would call it Gettysburg, Battle of. Egad, not that again!) The fact that the name of the War happens to end in an s doesn't necessarily make the use of the apostrophe technically correct. In my opinion. James F. Perry 20:35, 4 June 2009 (UTC)