It is always the case to add’s to given singular nouns. I would say anything that could be omitted would be a good addition to some sentences, but I’m not sure how would I add it. Why don’t people have to pronounce the’s, the way the word sounds has nothing to do with it.

The easiest rule to learn is simply that you add’s whenever you really say an extra /z/ at the end when forming the possessive, compared with how you say the non-possessive version. Let your ear be your guide. If you can’t understand the idea of the “silence”, then that’s all there is to it. No fancy rules full of exceptions. How can I speak in my ear, without talking in the other’s language?

So words ending in unstressed /iz/ are exempt, like for example this series’ end, that species’ demise, Mercedes’, Ramses’, Sophocles’, Socrates’, Achilles’, Diomedes’, Archimedes’, Eratosthenes’, Ulysses’. (But not trapeze’s, because that one is stressed!) How does that work?

To “in these days”, some people did not add another /z/ if it already had one, and so wrote Jesus’ to indicate they did not say an extra /z/ there compared with Jesus’s : both are just/dizs/ However, most people today now say Jesus’s, because it has three syllables: /dizsz/

Same with Moses with three syllables rather than the older Moses with only two. So know that things such as Ross and Chaz are really wrong, because no one says those with only one syllable. Exactly what is a common mistake not fixed at all?

You can say house of your boss is an extra syllable for this phrase.’I really get that’ Similarly, all the Jameses I have ever personally known have the extra /z/ tacked on when you are talking about something of theirs, which means it is for those speakers James’s house, even all the Jameses’ houses because nouns are only allowed one /z/ inflection, not two.

Why do you choose to write in your ear, because it represents speech and other forms of communication? If you used an extra radial, z, then you would write’s, but if you don’t use it, then you wouldn’t write it.. That’s why you from time to time see forms like for goodness’ sake or for conscience’ sake. Those are possessive but have no extra syllable.

As for the specific case of Aeneas, in older writing you will find that because his name already ends in /z/, people would suppress the extra one when they would form the possessive… like Aeneas’ escape from Troy. How can you confirm that this posits a possessive when spoken correctly? If when you’re actually saying ‘Aeneas escapes from Troy,’ it turns out that you’d use the one-syllable version of the word, and most people today say it, then it must be Aeneas’s escape from Troy. What are you worried about?

How many issississes are present in a row, from one to the other?

Bryan Garner, Garner’s Modern American Usage (second Edition) (2003) offers the following discussion of how to handle possessive proper names ending in -s : POSSESSIVES.

Singular Possessives. A. Singular Possessives. To form a singular possessive, add’s to most singular nouns—even those ending in -s, -ss, and -x (hence, Jones’s, Nichols’, Witness’, Vitex’s ). The

possessive of personal pronouns don’t take an apostrophe (our, your, it, theirs ) (1) There are four exceptions to this rule. … (2) Biblical and Classical names that end with a /zs/ or /eez/ sound take only the apostrophe. Aristophanes’ plays Jesus’ suffering Moses’ discovery Xerxes’ writings . No extra syllable or predicate is added in sounding the possessive form. What happens if a name is formed from a plural word? But some things have been added into the classic argument that before a sibilant possessive before sake is merely an apostrophe, without an additional prefix —hence for appearance’ sake (in standard), for goodness’ sake, and for conscience’ sake (in simpler ways): Thus General Motors may be made not General Motors’s, only. (4) According to traditional rules, a sibilant possessive before sake takes merely an apostrophe, without an additional pre

• The Chicago Manual of Style, sixteenth edition (2010) reverses the guideline that its predecessors promoted in precisely the area that the poster asks about. What is the relevant subsection of Chicago 16:7?

It is true that everyone have nouns, letters, and numbers. 16.Is there a definition? The general rule extends to improper nouns, including names ending in s, x, or z, in both their singular and plural forms, as well as letters and numbers. SINGULAR FORMS Kansas’s legislatureTacitus’s historiesChicago’s lakefrontBorges’s libraryMarx’s theoriesDickens’s novelsJesus’ adherentsMalraux’s masterpieceBerlioz’s worksJosquin des Prez’s motets…

7.

What people say of “Euripides”.. 18 Possessive of names like “Euripides.. In a departure from earlier practice Chicago does not longer recommend the traditional exception for proper classical names of two or more syllables that end in an eez sound. Such names form the possessive in the usual way (though when they are spoken, the addendum s is generally not pronounced). Where, how, etc., did Euripides’s tragedies occur? ]

Exceptions to general rule 7.

19 Possessive of nouns plural in form, singular in meaning. If the plural form of a noun is the same as the singular form and ends in s (i.e. when the plural form is the same as the singular) (thus. s= b = b = b=b=) ends of b=. , the plural is uninflected), the possessive of both are grouped by the addition of an apostrophe only and not of an alternative or singular. … (or, better, the first record of this species) politics’ true meaning;] economics’ forerunnersthis species first record ( or, better, the first record of this species)the United States’ role in international lawHighland Hills’ late mayorCallaway Gardens’ former curatorthe National Academy of Sciences’ new policyAmerican law;

7. 7. 20 “For. Sake” expressions. For the sake of euphony, a few for… sake expressions used with a singular noun that ends in s end in an apostrophe alone, omitting the additional s. for righteousness’ sakefor goodness’ sake for goodness’ sake Aside from these traditional formulations, however, the possessive in for… sake expressions may be formed in the normal way. for experience’s sakefor appearance’s sake ( or for appearance’s sake picture possessive] or the sake of appearance and for Jesus’s sake]; for Jesus’s sake. Dylan Thomas’ poetry], . Etta James’ singing” Whilst easy to apply and economical, such usage disregards pronunciation and is therefore not recommended by Chicago.

What is Chicago’s new guideline? Is her reasoning consistent with guideline 7? By the way 18 disregards pronunciation—and yet it is not therefore not recommended by Chicago.

Words into Form (1974), 3rd edition (1976) offers these guidelines on “formation of the possessive case”:

Proper names. The possessive form of almost all proper names is formed by adding s to a singular or apostrophe alone to a plural. James’sThe Davis’sBurns’sMarx’sSchultz’sDickens’sAdams’sSchultzes’sWherever the apostrophe and s would make the word difficult to pronounce, as when a sibilant occurs before the last syllable, the apostrophe may be used alone. Moses’ law Isis’ temple Xerxes’ army Jesus’ followersSo I would not add an apostrophe for ancient languages. If so, what should the possessive be. ]… By convention, Ancient classical names ending in s add only the apostrophe to form the possessive. Mars’ wrath|Shercules’ labors|.] Barnabas'(s)Augustus'(s)Ceres’Demosthenes’Euripides’Herodotus’Mars’Miltiades’Themistocles’Venus’Xerxes’Erasmus’Philip Augustus’Associated Press

Style Book and Briefing on Media Law : Aeneas’ [because that’s AP’s

If you are supposed to follow one of these style guides, your course is clear; if not, you have some research to do (if some other authority controls your style choices) or a decision to make (if you’re on your own).