You couldn't make it up
So Coun Len Gregory can't, sorry cant, see the point of apostrophes. I will resist the obvious reply as we appear to be stuck with councillors, at least for the forseeable future.
In councilspeak the humble apostrophe doesn't add any clarity and I am sure by the same token we could also lose full stops, semi-colons all those other annoying little punctuation marks along with one or two letters we don't seem to use that often.
The ruling cabinet believe most people are just confused by them which, sadly for the cabinet, says much more about the schools and education system in Birmingham than it does about the English language.
As for Coun Martin Mullaney, the chairman (I don't do chair or chairperson) of the transportation scrutiny committee, whatever that is when it is at home - he must be in the running already for the cobblers of the year award for his reasoning behind banning part of our mother tongue.
He justifies the barmy decision to change the English language with "It would be tragic if the ambulance couldn't find your street if you forgot to include the apostrophe when calling 999".
Perhaps death by punctuation is common in our Lib Dem member's more cultured neck of the woods of Moseley and King's Heath
Still, it does mean that Birmingham won't be putting them in the wrong place in future, which I suppose is some comfort. The state is already trying to legislate on what we are allowed to say, believe or even think and if it gets involved in the language itself we might as well pack up our tents and go home.
Older/Newer
« My word is my negotiable bond | No religion please, we're nurses »
16 Comments
Leave a comment
Profile
Roger Clarke - Birmingham’s very own Grumpy Old Man on what gets right up his nose.
Councillor Mullaney is not, as far as I know, the controller of the English language. Our council needs to take control of this and stop him imposing incorrect English on us and exposing our visitors to it. He cannot be allowed to make a fool of our city like this. I am so embarrassed that he's trying to make us look like illiterates.
Councillor Mullaney has had to bow to several areas of pressure regarding this, not least being the fact that there was already an inconsistency with the signs across Birmingham and to change them one way or the other would have generated. considerable costs.
Whilst I disagree completely with the decision I can at least understand the reasons behind it.
Part of the reasoning behind this decision is to stop this endless debate about whether or not a road sign should have an apostrophe.
Neither, is it about dumbing down the English language. It is not about getting rid of full stops, commas, semi-colon or colons. It about recognising the current confusion of names of places and simplifying the system.
Apostrophes were introduced to make the English written language clearer, they were not meant to make the language feel like a University Exam test where others are constantly correcting your grammer. What does it matter if Kings Heath has the possessive apostrophe or not. It does not change the geographical location.
We recently had a case where Council workers had to change the signage on the new Kings Heath public toilets because a resident insisted it should have an apostrophe. Did it really matter? Has that apostrophe improved the quality of that toilet? Do residents feel that can better find that toilet?
I would rather the Council focused its money on removing graffiti, litter and dumped rubbish, than on spending millions of pounds re-introducing the apostrophe back into road names.
Bringing council spending into the argument does not really have a lot to do with the price of fish in this particular case. No one is suggesting that the council should spend millions reintroducing apostrophes into road names and place names and I am sure everyone would agree that whether there is or isn't an apostrophe in the sign for King's Heath public toilets is not the most pressing concern of those using the facility.
That being said if the council had used correct grammar in the first place it would not have become embroiled in its own little Clochemerle moment.
It strikes me that the council had a choice in setting a style for street and place names. It could either take the literate route, in which case place names and street names would have a certain elegance and class about them - and would also have the advantage they would not produce complaints from residents. No cost is involved merely a policy and a literate replacement during routine maintenance.
Or, the council could follow the route it has done which is to take the easy option, the one involving least thought and effort where no one has to worry about where apostrophes go - and I do accept that finding someone capable of carrying out that task might well have been a struggle looking at signs in shops and supermarkets.
I does seem to be very much a "never mind, it will do" sort of attitude though and is not helped when a councillor is quoted as saying that he does not see the point of apostrophes.
If it is not dumbing down the language then it would be a struggle to find any argument that the decision is somehow lifting it up.
Could I direct readers to the following useful webpage on the use of apostrophes
whose view on the apostrophe I agree with:
http://www.gedmartin.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=125
The following paragraphs are relevant to the argument that apostrophes should be dropped from place names:
"While you cannot simply ignore the apostrophe, you should avoid using it where the result would be inelegant. Remember that French, for instance,
manages very well just with an "of" form ("la plume de ma tante"). Many of the examples below are grammatically correct, but they are marked with an asterisk (*) because they are stylistically awful. Try to rewrite any phrase
which sounds full of hisses and ZZZZs."
"10. There is no clear rule about the use of the apostrophe in place names, although the trend is towards dropping it altogether, except in a few
well-established traditional examples. St. James's Park in London retains S-apostrophe-S, Newcastle United football club play at St. James' Park [S-apostrophe], while a starkly unpleasant shopping mall in Edinburgh is simply the St. James Centre [no-apostrophe-at-all]. In Canada, the freight rate deal of 1897 is called the Crow's Nest Pass Agreement, but today's maps
show the Crowsnest Pass. In some cases, the process has been taken even further. The Hudson's Bay Company was founded in 1670, but today the bay itself is just Hudson Bay."
The use of the possessive apostrophe in place names does cause confusion. Search on google for "Kings Heath" and you get 318,000 results. Search for "King's Heath" all you get 41,500. So even google can't differentiate between Kings Heath and King's Heath.
Earl's Court in London has an apostrophe, while Barons Court next door does not. Barons Court was never owned by a Baron, so a possessive apostrophe is not needed.
This fact about Barons Court is the crux of this issue. To understand why a place name needs a possessive apostrophe, you need to understand its
history. In short, it is not 'easy' as apostrophe supporters claim, to decide whether a place should have a possessive apostrophe or not. You need to research its history. That makes the continued use of apostrophes in place names an utter nonsense.
So what is wrong with carrying out a little research into the origin of names? It would certainly be a lot more worthwhile that all the diversity, equality and other esoteric jobs that seem to exist in the Alice in Wonderland world of taxpayer funded bodies. Earl's Court was where the Earls of Oxford held their manorial courts while Barons Court, which, as you say, did not belong to a baron, was a bright idea of early developers possibly influenced by both Earl's Court next door and even one of its residents, Christian Frederick Charles Alexander, who had abdicated as Margrave of Brandenburg-Ansbach and moved to London from Germany. He was married to an English wife Elizabeth, the widow of the 6th Baron Craven. So you see the reason one has an apostrophe and the other does not is already worth a discussion in the pub or even a question in the pub quiz. So not only would road signs be correct they would also be historically accurate and might even make people more interested in the area where they live.
I was the person who posted, by mistake, as anonymous.
If the residents of Birmingham are happy for the Council to employ historians to research the history of place names to establish possessive apostrophes, fund a board who will examine the findings of that research, pay for all the signs in a road to be changed in one go. Pay for a register to be kept and distributed of the historically correct road and place names....that would be fantastic. If they are happy to have the level of graffiti and litter removed to fund it....even better.
Personally, I don't think the loss of the apostrophe in place names matters. In the same way that the following phrases no longer need the apostrophe: drivers license, students union, travellers cheques, parents night, boys school .... and so. These phrases have dropped the apostrophe, since they are now seen as descriptive. Place names are similar, in being descriptive.
Why does anything that crosses the council house threshold have to involve staffing, boards, committees and no doubt support staff, budgets and vast expense? And why does there have to be a choice between litter and graffiti or apostrophes? If you do not want to spend vast amounts then the city is littered with schools where I am quite sure many pupils would enjoy carrying out some prime research into the areas, streets and roads where they live. They might learn something about their communities - and the use and purpose of apostrophies. Then there are a number of respected local historians who would be delighted to help while the local studies department of the library might even pitch in if they were asked nicely. So already it is not only an interesting subject but an educational tool and a community project. Local newspapers could even become involved if only through their letters columns and websites and critics of the apostrophe ban will have a chance to put their money where their mouths are and add their two penn’orth to the effort.
Now no one is saying that every sign that is missing an apostrophe should be replaced by the end of the week, or even the end of the year, and I can guarantee that even the most pedantic resident would be quite happy with a commitment by the city council that apostrophes would be retained where appropriate. No cost, no charge, just a commitment. Then, when a new sign is needed or an existing one needs replacing during routine maintenance the correct version can be erected. Simple really. As for your assertion that the apostrophe has gone missing on a whole host of phrases then a quick check on Google will disprove that theory starting with the National Union of Students, not a body renowned for its support of the establishment, which helps you find your nearest students' union and we can work our way through to a whole host of boys' schools.
Roger,
How about you organise the Birmingham Mail, it's columnists and historians to draw up a definitive list of which roads in Birmingham should have the possessive apostrophe? - any roads not on the list will not have the possessive apostrophe.
The Mail would also allow residents and businesses to request the apostrophe to be removed as well.
The Birmingham Mail then commits to distributing this list annually in their newspaper, especially to the residents and businesses in the roads affected.
Do that and maybe the Council will rethink its policy.
To illustrate the problem of whether or not a possessive apostrophe should be in a road name, could tell us which of the following road names should have an apostrophe?
Reddings Road (Moseley)
Lozells Road (Handsworth)
Queens Road (Aston)
Waterworks Road (Ladywood)
Deakins Road (Yardley)
The Radleys (Yardley)
Garretts Green Lane (Yardley)
Pritchatts Road (Edgbaston)
Willows Road (Balsall Heath)
Waldrons Moor (Stirchley)
I will pass your comments on to Steve Dyson, the Editor, meanwhile I am sure there must be some readers out there who can give you some help on the list and to make it easier for them I will add a new entry to that effect.
Cheers Rogers,
Let me assure you, that I am a big supporter of preserving our heritage (you will find that I have put my councillor job on the line for our heritage) and I am all for grammatically correct English. However, I hope the examples I have shown, will highlight that possessive apostrophes in place names are not straightforward.
As I am a man of leisure these days, find the wherewithal for a couple of days a week and I will sort them out for you. At least ninety five per cent of roads are straightforward while most of the rest could be decided without too much argument which leaves the few difficult ones which need to be researched which all adds to the history of Birmingham.
Cllr. Mullaney, we don't have a drivers (sic) license (sic) in this country, it's called a Driving Licence.
Can't punctuate, can't spell either it seems.
As I go round the shops I constantly think that illiterates should not be allowed to write signs.
Neither should they be pandered to by your council's bizarre decision to "abolish" the apostrophe.
By what right do you unilaterally change the Queen's English (or, as you would have it, the Queens English)?
Liverpool was last year's (years?) European Capital of Culture. Would Birmingham folk really be happy being residents of this year's (sic) European Capital of Publicly Displayed Illiteracy?
One can but hope that more sensible councillors are working away to do away with an absurd idea which no educated person can possibly support.
response to Bill.
I think you should have a read of the Birmingham Mail. You will find this newspaper has already dropped the apostrophe from place names.
To Martin:
Perhaps the Mail's Editor would care to respond to that but two wrongs don't make a right. If the Editor threw a brick through a shop window would you you feel obliged to do likewise? Of course not.
However if you did the damage done would be as nothing compared with what you are prepared to inflict on the English language.
All to save a few pounds.