Are These Sentences Correct for My Thesis?

[n0_3sc]

I am being paranoid about my english, which of the following sentences are correct?

1)
"...increasing a samples length..." OR
"...increasing a sample's length..."

2)
"...having known a standardized samples cross-section..." OR
"...having known a standardized sample's cross-section..."

3)
"...signals defining a molecules characteristics..." OR
"...signals defining a molecule's characteristics..."

Anyone with the right answer will go on the acknowledgments page of my thesis!

 

[Math Is Hard]

The second case appears correct for each of these.

 

[mgb_phys]

All are 's you use this when it belongs to something

 

[humanino]

All are 's you use this when it belongs to something

What about words' plural ?
So what about

acknowledgments' page

Am I overdoing it ?

BTW, it's "please", not "prease" :tongue2:

 

[n0_3sc]

BTW, it's "please", not "prease" :tongue2:

It's also "english" not "engrish"

 

[n0_3sc]

So when would you use "equations" compared to "equation's"?

eg. "...Maxwell's equations..." or "...Maxwell's equation's...".
(I guess that implies the equations "belong" to Maxwell right?).

 

[n0_3sc]

So, can I be on the acknowredgments' page !? :uhh:

AHAHA :rofl:

.
..
...
...
...no.

Also why are you putting an apostraphe after "acknowredgments"? I'm pretty sure that's incorrect. You could say "acknowredgments' pages" I think?

 

[humanino]

Also why are you putting an apostraphe after "acknowredgments"? I'm pretty sure that's incorrect. You could say "acknowredgments' pages" I think?

Because that's the way we would translate french, literally. We would say that the page "belongs to" the acknowredgments, as we would certainly use "Maxwell's equations". Yet I do not think these forms are commonly used in english.

Let's wait for english speakers' valuable advices !

I can correct your french if you want though

 

[cristo]

You spelt standardised wrong!

 

[n0_3sc]

You spelt standardised wrong!

Standardize = american spelling.

 

[cristo]

Standardize = american spelling.

Exactly. I thought you wanted your English corrected? :uhh:

 

[Math Is Hard]

All about apostrophes:

http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/g_apost.html

 

[Kurdt]

I've come down with a bit of apostropheitis from nowhere recently. There must be something going round.

 

[Evo]

You spelt standardised wrong!

And it's "spelled" not "spelt", American English is the correct English. :tongue2:

Spelt is an ancestor to wheat.

 

[Kurdt]

Oooh, there's going to be trouble.

 

[OmCheeto]

All about apostrophes:

http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/g_apost.html

Thank you MIH. I've always been confused about apostrophes. Except for of course, the trivially obvious ones listed above, and on the previously non-mentioned previous page.

 

[mgb_phys]

That doesn't begin to dig into the confusion of apostrophes
There's pizza for instance http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexperts/faq/aboutspelling/pizza
Or http://www.ncsu.edu/ncsu/grammar/Apostro3.html

 

[Math Is Hard]

I am a recovering apostrophe abuser. I donate regularly to the http://www.apostrophe.org.uk" .

 

[Chi Meson]

I am being paranoid about my english, which of the following sentences are correct?

1)
"...increasing a samples length..." OR
"...increasing a sample's length..."

2)
"...having known a standardized samples cross-section..." OR
"...having known a standardized sample's cross-section..."

3)
"...signals defining a molecules characteristics..." OR
"...signals defining a molecule's characteristics..."

Anyone with the right answer will go on the acknowledgments page of my thesis!

Hair splitting time!

While it has already been stated that the second example of each of these is the more correct one, they are not the best choice for what you want to say.

I would prefer to read
1)...increasing the length of a sample...
2)...having known the cross-section of a standardized sample...
3)...signals defining the characteristics of a molecule...

Although the rule is old (arcane, in fact), the apostrophe s is a contraction of "his"; "John's Pony" is a contraction of "John, his pony." By it's original nature, the apostrophe s lends to a personification of the noun and its application to inanimate objects and intangible concepts should be limited, especially in a formal report (where most contractions should be avoided in general).

But sometimes, when the time is right, you simply have to break the rule's fingers.

 

[n0_3sc]

Thanks for that Chi. Instead of debating these contractions, I should've been avoiding them from the start. And you're right, your versions sound more formal.

I think some serious review is required on my part...

 

[OmCheeto]

Argh!

I messed up in another thread:

drinking piña colada's,

Does one have to follow the english rue, if one is borrowing from another language?

 

[Gokul43201]

So when would you use "equations" compared to "equation's"?

The former spelling is used to indicate the plural noun.
Example: All of these equations are unnecessarily long.

The latter is used when referring to something belonging to the equation.
Example: This equation's length is excessive. (the 'length' belongs to the 'equation')

eg. "...Maxwell's equations..." or "...Maxwell's equation's...".
(I guess that implies the equations "belong" to Maxwell right?).

The first one is correct. That the equations - note the plural - belong to Maxwell is taken care of by the apostrophe in Maxwell's. The thing that possesses takes on the apostrophe, not the thing that is possessed.

 

[n0_3sc]

Ok now I have an easier question. Is it:

"...thus, the development of robust and simple sources is being actively investigated." OR

"...thus, the development of robust and simple sources are being actively investigated."

 

[cristo]

Ok now I have an easier question. Is it:

"...thus, the development of robust and simple sources is being actively investigated."

This is correct.

 

[turbo]

I am being paranoid about my english, which of the following sentences are correct?

1)
"...increasing a samples length..." OR
"...increasing a sample's length..."

2)
"...having known a standardized samples cross-section..." OR
"...having known a standardized sample's cross-section..."

3)
"...signals defining a molecules characteristics..." OR
"...signals defining a molecule's characteristics..."

Anyone with the right answer will go on the acknowledgments page of my thesis!

Basic (if there is any such thing) rules about the use of apostrophes in English.

Never throw them in if not needed.
In technical writing, they are generally used only in the possessive sense.
When using them on plural nouns, use them after the plural "s".

That will get you by most of the time. English is a crap language, so NEVER accept any grammarian guidelines (especially mine). Have a nice day.

 

[n0_3sc]

...English is a crap language, so NEVER accept any grammarian guidelines...

That's true, but we write and speak it and it pays to get it right for something as formal as a thesis.

Oh and thanks cristo.

 

[cristo]

Oh and thanks cristo.

No worries. Of course, one could argue that the adverb is moot in the phrase "actively investigated," since I'm not aware that it is possible to investigate something passively!

 

[Gokul43201]

Ok now I have an easier question. Is it:

"...thus, the development of robust and simple sources is being actively investigated." OR

"...thus, the development of robust and simple sources are being actively investigated."

Ask yourself what is being investigated. Is the development (singular) being investigated or are the sources (plural) being investigated?

 

[Ouabache]

All about apostrophes:

http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/g_apost.html

Yay Purdue! My alma mata comes through again..

 

[epenguin]

Yes the x's (or xs' for plural x) are called 'genitive' or 'possessive' meaning 'of x' or 'belonging to x' and are quite similar to 'x no' in Japanese.

But as Chi meson says when the subject especially an impersonal one becomes at all complicated it is better and more natural for us to use the 'of' construction. E.g. "Schrodinger's idea" but "the ideas of the founders of quantum mechanics" - you could just do the first the other way, but not the second.[There are other uses of 's just to represent an unpronounced vowel as in "it's" meaning "it is" etc., but not so common in written formal English.]

 

[n0_3sc]

English in school would've been more exciting had they spent more time teaching what's been said in this thread. It feels as if they just touched on the basics.
I've learned more here than studying Shakespeare or poetry...

 

[Chi Meson]

English in school would've been more exciting had they spent more time teaching what's been said in this thread. It feels as if they just touched on the basics.
I've learned more here than studying Shakespeare or poetry...

But when it comes the time ere thesis due
and thru' the twilight hours do strike thine keys
You will have Shakespeare's lofty crown on you
with idiom fine as molecular breeze.

and that's all that matters. Because science departments just love iambic pentameter.

 

[epenguin]

You reminded me


'For your Professor pray prepare
no paragraph Sir overlook!
And soon you will become aware
He never deviates from the book
But write it down Sir, every bit!
As though the Holy Ghost dictated it!'

 

[n0_3sc]

^^ oh crap, what have I done!

 

[Chi Meson]

You reminded me


'For your Professor pray prepare
no paragraph Sir overlook!
And soon you will become aware
He never deviates from the book
But write it down Sir, every bit!
As though the Holy Ghost dictated it!'

Quadrameter is for sissies!