How would you make parents-in-law possessive? Parents'-in-law, parents-in-law's, or parents-in-laws'.
And this hardly seems worth starting a new thread over, so I'll put it here.
Another site gives as their word today misoneism, meaning hatred of innovation. Would this make a hatred of Japanese soups misomisoism?
Bingley
How would you make parents-in-law possessive? Parents'-in-law, parents-in-law's, or parents-in-laws'
I'd use the highlighted choice above, but only if forced. I would more likely say something like, "We stayed at my wife's parents' house." And even then I'd use my wife's name if I thought the person I was talking to would know who I was talking about.
Let's start with the singular first. "I stayed at my mother-in-law's house" sounds fine to me and looks OK too. So, from that, we come to either parents-in-law's house or parents-in-laws' house. Assuming you only have one sets of parents-in-law, the possessive would be parents-in-law's, wouldn't it?
Parents is plural. "I stayed at my parents' house." But if I am talking about only one parent, I say, "I stayed at my parent's house."
misoneism, meaning hatred of innovation
and would a moderate degree of distate for inovation be mesomisoneism?
Thanks TEd and Flatlander, that's what I thought but it just didn't look right. The context by the way was "She knows her parents-in-law's birthdays."
Bingley
Still doesn't look right, Bingley. Parents-in-law shouldn't be allowed to own
anything!
"She knows her parents-in-law's birthdays."I'm with CK - it still doesn't look right. This sounds like a case for
Prepositional Phrase!! More powerful than an apostrophe! Sexier than a dangling participle! Able to be strung together so that a sentence is right next door to incomprehensible! [coronet flourish] It's some words... it's inane! It's
Prepositional Phrase!"She knows the birthdays of her parents-in-law."My work here is done.
[coronet flourish] You've been crowned, f-babe?
I still say it should be parents-in-laws'. Bingley, since you are unsure (somebody fan me, quick), the only person whose uncited word I will take is Nicholas'.
it ... doesn't look right.
Well, the prepositional phrase doesn't *sound right. So I guess it depends on whether you're going to say it or write it. If you really must write down what someone said, you're on your own.
WARNING: DIVERGENCE FROM THE MAIN SUBJECT
This discussion of relations brings to mind something interesting which I encounted the other day. Chinese has two different words for "sister-in-law"; one for "wife's older sister" and a different word for "wife's younger sister". Although the article I read didn't say so, I would presume the same applies to brothers-in-law. I am also aware that in a good many languages there are different words for "aunt/uncle on the mother's side" and "aunt/uncle on the father's side" and that there are, even in English, different words for different kinds of cousins. (Cousin-german comes to mind.)
Does this indicate that we English speakers are not as concerned with the niceties of family relationships as other people who need such terms because the intricacies of the family are important? I would imagine that the two different words in Chinese reflect that culture's old-time acknowledgement of rank and position in families as well as in other relationships.
Do any of you have some more instances to share and/or comment on?
Some Indonesian relationship terms:
kakak older sibling
adik younger sibling
Even twins get divided into kakak and adik.
Saudara male relative in the same generation (includes brothers and male cousins)
Saudari female relative in the same generation (includes sisters and female cousins)
Also a term of address used to promote solidarity; not as common as adik and kakak for actual relatives.
bapak and ayah father. I think ayah implies a closer less formal relationship.
ibu mother
bapak and ibu are also used as terms of address, Mr. and Ms.; also seorang bapak a man seorang ibu a woman
orang tua parents (literally old people: in slang abbreviated to ortu)
kakek grandfather
nenek grandmother
also used to mean old man or old woman (also note: nenek moyang the ancestors)
anak child
putra son putri daughter (much less commonly used than anak)
ipar brother or sister in law
menantu son or daugher in law
mertua parent in law
besan son or daughter in law's parent
om or paman uncle (om is also used as a friendly term of address to a man of one's parents' generation)
tante or bibi (again tante is also used as friendly term of address to a woman of one's parents' generation)
keponakan nephew or niece (but unless you were being very precise you would probably call them anak)
sepupu cousin (again you would probably call them kakak or adik)
Bingley
RE:
Saudara male relative in the same generation (includes brothers and male cousins)
Saudari female relative in the same generation (includes sisters and female cousins)
and is there a term for cousin not in the same gereration?
my father's family is 'fractured'-- he was born when his mother was in her 50's, and she was the youngest in her family, so my grandmother was born when her mother (my greatgrand mother) was 48.
the result, many of my father's first cousins were 40+years older than he was. so i have many relatives who are second cousins, once removed.. (they are my age, but i belong with their parent's generation, who are my second cousins.)
it is confusing.. most of us didn't understand how it worked till we were adults.. and it caused some problems, since my mother insisted on no "fake" aunts. So some of my cousins (all with a comman grandmother,) were shocked to her me call their grandmother, Annie.. but she was my first cousin, once removed!
Jackie harrumphs®: I still say it should be parents-in-laws'. Bingley, since you are unsure... the only person whose uncited word I will take is Nicholas'.
And since Nicholas's [sic] word isn't here, I'll leap into the breach: "in-law" is a descriptive, and in English we don't pluralize adjectives. So I go with "parents'-in-law." For analogies, look at "attorneys-general" and "passers-by."
Having said that, I agree the construction is awkward and should be proscribed post-haste.
and mesomezzomisoneism a tepid dislike for the husky caberet chanteuse? (fr.?)
ASp:
In speaking the sentence, which would you say:
1. I was at my mother's-in-law house.
2. I was at my mother-in-law's house.
I would always use the second one, never the first. Hmmm. We could recast it. Peggy was at her mom's house. I went along. Or: Peggy wasn't at her mom's house, but I was. (Now, Mrs. Robinson, would you please put that back on!)
TdE
Terrorism delenda est
I'll take Door Number 2, TEd. So much for grammar. Thanks for the aural outpoint.
See if this makes sense (and no finger pointing and guffawing if it doesn't 'cause I never claimed to be resident expert, so there)
Can't the whole construction 'mother-in-law' be a noun? The term names one particular person. Without the 'in-law' you are talking about a completely different entity.
I see it the same way I see the term highrise. High is a descriptive but having been joined to rise becomes part of a noun. True the hyphen has been removed but isn't that just a matter of time.
Thus Mother-in-law's house would fit the bill.
Oh wait, I just thougth of the plural. We'd say Mothers-in-law wouldn't we? Ah heck. Colour me clueless again.
I'll stick to "belle-mère / belles-mères". This is the first time I can say it is so much clearer in French.
Actually, I agree with you, Bel. Sorry, Jo, but while the construction of "mother-in-law" is a noun modified by an adjective, the whole shebang is one word albeit with two hyphens, and stands on its own as a noun. Ergo, it
has to be
mother-in-law's.
[Afterthought]
Oh shit, I'm in the same country as her now. Why did I do it? Just how far is it from Wellingborough to Edinburgh anyway? I think I'll go and get lost in London tomorrow ... 
"Okay, let me try this again," she mumbles.
In Spanish:
Cuñado=brother of your spouse
Cuñada=sister of your spouse
Pay attention, this is where it gets tricky-
Concuño=husband of your spouse's sister
Concuña=wife of your spouse's brother
Spanish also has names for the relationship between the parents and the godparents of a child.
Comadre=godmother of your child or mother of your godchild
Compadre=godfather of your child or father of your godchild
¡TA-DA! I have finally taken the time to get the tildes, accents, and punctuations mastered! It's a Wahoo moment.
SWMBO and MILWMBO - poor, poor CapK
In reply to:
and is there a term for cousin not in the same gereration?
my father's family is 'fractured'
I think saudara/i would be used for people who are more or less your own age, and for much older cousins you would use om or tante, but that's just a feeling. It's as much a question of etiquette as language and quite possibly varies from ethnic group to ethnic group.
Bingley
SWMBO and MILWMBO - poor, poor CapK
Thanks Bel. I just feel so - endangered! [running and hiding -e]
parents'-in-law for the the whole bunch of in-laws on either side. Writing of course, kinda awkward to say "parentses!"
So why not "all the in-laws" and skip parents?
Or is that too easy?
what am I missing here, guys? We have a description (a noun phrase) with the form
~in-law, with the stem varied by wether it is singular or plural. But in both cases the possessive suffix is surely
's. Or is that all much too simple?
Well somewhere in all the posts up there you will see where we ran into a conundrum Mav.
You say "my mother-in-law's house in nice" because the whole term 'mother-in-law' is the noun BUT If mother-in-law is really a noun then why isn't it mother-in-laws (instead of mothers-in-law) when referring to the mom on both sides of the family. And is it mothers-in-law's houses or mother-in-laws' houses.
And when you refer to both parents on both sides it becomes an unweildy mouthful (leave that one alone dear - people are sensitive these days
and after that whole Bingley size of fig-leaf debacle, well, nuff said)
why isn't it mother-in-laws...yeahbut®
that's exactly what I do say. One MIL, 2 MILs, and even with the benefits of modern marriage 3 or more MILs
imho, Mothers-in-law is pedantic and tastes wrong.
No problemo!
and what also occurs to me, reading this again, is that it is partly a question as mentioned above of the compaction effect over time: whilst your proposal woud have been fine in the days when we were first talking about 'mother' qualified by legal status, I would argue we now universally talk about muthrinlaw - it's in effect one word.
Cuñado=brother of your spouse
Cuñada=sister of your spouse
Pay attention, this is where it gets tricky-
Concuño=husband of your spouse's sister
Concuña=wife of your spouse's brother
OK, consuelo, but what about the spouse of your brother/sister? I've always found it odd that English doesn't have a seperate word for that relationship.
We do Flatlander. The spouse of your brother is your sister-in-law, and the spouse of your sister is your brother-in-law.
Were you, perhaps, talking about the siblings of your brother(or sister)-in-law? There is no 'one' word to describe these people, well, "strangers" if you really don't know them.
I asked, OK... but what about the spouse of your brother/sister?
and belM noted, The spouse of your brother is your sister-in-law, and the spouse of your sister is your brother-in-law.
I should have been clearer. I meant that it seems strange to me that both the brother of your spouse and the spouse of your brother are given the same title. I like how there is a name for the spouse of your spouse's sibling -- I have some very good relationships with my concuño/as (plurals, consuelo?) -- and I was wondering if there was a difference between the names of the different relationships I mentioned above.
...how many solicitors-general, attorneys-general, and even Governors-general I must report your infraction to?
You must have handsful of them.
Note: the -s- plural marker infix!
>You say "my mother-in-law's house in nice" because the whole term 'mother-in-law' is the noun BUT If mother-in-law is really a noun then why isn't it mother-in-laws (instead of mothers-in-law) when referring to the mom on both sides of the family. And is it mothers-in-law's houses or mother-in-laws' houses.
Moot point. If you have more than one mother-in-law you have a LOT more to worry about than where to put a little old apostrophe or -s for pluralization.
It was bigamy to bring that up!
The spouse of your brother or sister still falls under the same category as the brother or sister of your spouse. Sorry, that combination escaped me. I think it must have run under the desk while I was learning to make the tilde
.
In my family they are known as out-laws[tee-hee emoticon]
In reply to:
after that whole Bingley size of fig-leaf debacle, well, nuff said
Have I missed something? Been taken over by aliens? I don't remember mentioning any figging leaves.
Bingley
While we're on the subject when did -in-law come to refer your spouse's relatives, anyway? In Jane Austen's time mother-in-law meant stepmother, and brothers- and sisters-in-law were just called brother and sister.
Bingley
Well, Bingley
old chappie, we're all much, much younger than you. We, unlike you, weren't around during the Regency period. We all defer to your greater longevity!
That's the problem with cryogenics. One misses out on developments which occurred between the two periods in one's life.
Bingley
You mean you're just freezing us out from time to time? Typical!
just chillin' out, not meaning to give anyone the cold shoulder.
Bingley
Oh, you-all, my sides hurt--you-all're killin' me!
Where to start? Oh, I know:
It was bigamy to bring that up! Trust you for that, Ted!
...it seems strange to me that both the brother of your spouse and the spouse of your brother are given the same title. This seems strange to me, too, unless it is where homosexual marriages are legal.
...solicitors-general, attorneys-general, and even Governors-general...passersby...handsful Good ones, brethren.
figging leaves...cryogenics...just chillin' out, not meaning to give anyone the cold shoulder You mean you're just freezing us out from time to time? Oh, ow ow ow!
attorneys general
I have been told (but disagree with) the notion that trade union follows the same rule, so the plural would be trades union. To me, the noun is union and the modifier is trade so the plural is trade unions. If the union incoporates several trades then it is a trades union.
In fact my POD agrees with me:
Trades Union Congress n. official representative body of British trade unions. I
Oooops...you're right Bingley. It was the size of Geoff's fig leaf we discussed. We would never discuss your fig leaf size, no sireee bob. The size of your fig leaf is the stuff of history.
Now whether it is the history of comedy or that of heroic deeds is an other matter.
While fully appreciating that bel's hysterical -- oops, "historical" -- post above was but a scholarly scientific interest in fig-leaf sizing: botany and all,
had I not undertood that this board is devoted to matters linguistic, not scientific?
But of course Keiva dear. The linguistics of botany is quite interesting dontcha know.
*Somebody’s* feeling a little threatened by fig-leaf comparisons. Men are sooo sensitive about their botany.
Bel says,
Men are sooo sensitive about their botanyNo, bel, your interest in
fig leaves is a of matter botany, as I'd said.
Now had you been talking about men, I'd have said your scientific interest was zoology -- but would have been compelled to
for you.
Somebody’s* feeling a little threatened by fig-leaf comparisons. Men are sooo sensitive about their botany.bel, that was great!
Oooops...you're right Bingley... The size of your fig leaf is the stuff of history. Well now, I feel sure that our Mr. B. surely has a
wide variety...
bel says, "Men are sooo sensitive about their botany."
bel, according to my dictionary the word "about" can mean either:
a) in the immediate vicinity of;
b) with regard to.
In which sense were you using that word?
May I adjudge from context that you were using the first sense (as your main reference concerned biology rather than psychology)?
May I adjudge from context that you were using the first sense (as your main reference concerned biology rather than psychology)?No, no, Keiva, she said
botany.
(1) Jackie, this can be resolved only with bel's participation.
That is, you cannot hope to win a "no-bel peace prize". Who, after all, is "in the soup"?
(2) Substantively: since botany=plants (not animals), we must conclude that as to botany, men haven't gotany.
So when bel said, "Men are sooo sensitive about their botany," she had the wrong scientific term, which I corrected.
The more-primary definition of "about" is the first one I cited, further suggesting that bel's comment concerned male biology, rather than male psychology. But bel must clarify this, if she wishes we men to respond properly.
homosexual marriages
A question about this just occurred to me: Does one party in a homosexual marriage take the last name of the other, or do they both keep their original names? Or do they hyphenate them?
well rather than talking about botany or zoology,Bel could have been on about biology, more specifically about symbiotic relationships.. and in this case, men might well be concerned about their botany.
and while we're on the subject, aren't Fig trees botanically related to rubber trees?
while we're on the subject, aren't Fig trees botanically related to rubber trees?
Now stop that, Helen. My sides are splitting!
note: blue color chosen on purpose.
aren't Fig trees botanically related to rubber trees?
Helen, that is absolutely great. Bravo, bravo, clap, clap, clap, clap.
Oh wait, sorry, sorry, if you have rubber you don't get the clap.
Now, do we ladies HAVE to exlain all this stuff to you gents, who are evidently having a little trouble over the inuendo flying back and forth. Whoosh, right over their little heads heh ladies?
(snicker snicker, little heads, snicker)
I dunno, i don't think its their little heads that are really causing the problems- unless it's a problem with a vascular disease that has some how impeeded the flow of blood to the head they are supposed to be able to think with.
oh wait, that does really clear things up, does it?
of Troy: aren't Fig trees botanically related to rubber trees?
wow: My sides are splitting!
Is it coincidental, my dears, that your two posts were near-simultaneous with bel's post, in another thread, concerning unplanned pregnancies?
so what your point Keiva, do you think it is a conspiracy?
or are you afraid that great minds think alike and biology being destiny and all that, feel le(a)ft out..
feel left out? Not at all, dears, as bel, and old hand herself, specifically invited me to join her for drinks. I am an enthusiast, and you can anticipate I will participate, however you dissipate.
anatomy being destiny and all that
Agreed -- and you may note that the psychological texts include no such term as venus envy.
women of the world, united (bel, Jackie, of troy, and wow)
Ladies (a term used advisedly), as a well-respected, upstanding member of my community, I simply do not do that. At least one of you four will have to leave.
I remember being taught "mothers-in-law" and "trades union" (and also "courts martial") as correct English (although I've never had call to use any of them). Along similar lines does anyone have an opinion on what is the accepted plural of "son of a gun" (and the obvious alternative)? What I was taught suggests "Sons of a gun", but common-sense dictates this can't be right - it would have to be "Sons of guns" because the "guns" would be different...
upstanding member That's it, I'm outta here. CK, may I borrow your tent?
==========================================================
Goatboy (I am very curious as to how you came by that name, by the way), you're giving me a headache with your sons of guns. Try thinking of the expression as son-of-a-gun--that should clear things right up.
That's it, I'm outta here. CK, may I borrow your tent?Well, I'll have to ask it, but I don't think it has anything on this weekend ...
Nope, it's free. All yours. Come and get it.
Nope, it's free. All yours. Come and get it.Thanks, Sweetie! (whew)
On my way.
<<(although I've never had call to use any of them)
As in, "I was speaking to my mothers-in-law"?
courts martial -- courts marital
trades union -- I've always heard trade union/trade unions; on no information and belief, I would guess trades union was singular and the plural 'trades unions'.
>Sorry, Jo, but while the construction of "mother-in-law" is a noun modified by an adjective ...
Funny, I don't remember having a view on this, is my memory really that bad?
By the way, you are f-a-r from safe in Wellingborough, I am a great traveller you know and I have a very good information network. You will, like TEd, have to warm the teapot. Be warned.
I'd be inclined to agree with Goatboy and go for sons of guns. The only similar example which springs to mind is son of a b**** which became sons of b****es in the movie "O brother, where art thou?" (Not that I necessarily believe this to be an optimal source of information)
And I managed to avoid any sexual innuendo. Except maybe inclined. And springs. Damn you people.
In reply to:
The size of your fig leaf is the stuff of history.
Just so long as it is understood that while it may be making history, it is not history yet.
Bingley
out-laws for in-laws
I have heard the phrase out-laws (for in-laws) and even parents-out-law fairly often, but it is usually applied to parents of the partner in a long standing but non-legalised partnership. Which leads to me to the word question, why are parents of a spouse in-law? Are there, or were there once upon a time, rights and responsibilities, bestowed by this relationship? Inheritance, rights of succession and wardship for child brides are areas that spring to mind as possibilities.
I think the idea is that in (canon?) law your e.g. parents-in-law have the same relationship to you as your own parents for the rules about who you can and can't marry (after your spouse and theirs have died of course).
Bingley
<<I think the idea is that in (canon?) law your e.g. parents-in-law have the same relationship to you as your own parents for the rules about who you can and can't marry..
YOU MEAN I CAN'T MARRY MY MOTHER-IN-LAW???!!!!!
Men are sooo sensitive about their botany.
whereas women are sooo sensitive about their bottomy!
In reply to:
YOU MEAN I CAN'T MARRY MY MOTHER-IN-LAW???!!!!!
According to the Oxford Dictionary of Law, this has been possible in England since 1986, provided that both your wife and her father are dead. Divorce doesn't count for these purposes. A priest can refuse to marry you and your mother-in-law but you can have a civil marriage.
Bingley
but you can have a civil marriage
which is more than can be said for many wives *EG*
civil marriage
Then does the term "Sybil marriage" refer to bigamy, or rather to the marriage (which of-troy suggested is ideal) in which he'll never see-'er?
<<A priest can refuse to marry you
Bless you, Bingley! Let me see if I understand you aright; a priest can refuse to marry me, but my mother-in-law cannot?
In reply to:
Then does the term "Sybil marriage" refer to bigamy, or rather to the marriage (which of-troy suggested is ideal) in which he'll never see-'er?
BA-SIL
Bingley
In reply to:
a priest can refuse to marry me, but my mother-in-law cannot?
No,no. A priest can refuse to marry both of you.
Bingley
A priest can refuse to marry both of you.Bingley, if I take your sense aright,
A priest, being celibate, would refuse to marry
each of you.
To marry
both would be bigamy.
And you know none of us here would ever go in for any of that, right? It's cereal marriage, or no marriage at all.
Rod, I've never researched whether there is any peculiar legal issue underlying the "[fill in the relative]-in-law" designation, but I've always thought that the in-law designation served to distinguish one's relatives by marriage from one's relatives by birth just as a matter of normal social interaction. You biological parents are your parents-in-fact, while your parents by marriage are your parents-in-law.
The same distinction is usually unstated but legally important regarding attorneys-at-law and attorneys-in-fact. A lay person who is specifically granted the power of attorney by his principal is an attorney-in-fact, while one with the authority to represent and act for another by operation of law is an attorney-at-law.
This discussion of relations brings to mind something interesting which I encounted the other day. Chinese has two different words for "sister-in-law"; one for "wife's older sister" and a different word for "wife's younger sister". Although the article I read didn't say so, I would presume the same applies to brothers-in-law. I am also aware that in a good many languages there are different words for "aunt/uncle on the mother's side" and "aunt/uncle on the father's side" and that there are, even in English, different words for different kinds of cousins. (Cousin-german comes to mind.)
Does this indicate that we English speakers are not as concerned with the niceties of family relationships as other people who need such terms because the intricacies of the family are important? I would imagine that the two different words in Chinese reflect that culture's old-time acknowledgement of rank and position in families as well as in other relationships.
I also have wondered that English has a single term to describe both a person who is your husband's brother and a person who is your sister's husband. I suspect that a number of other cultures have distinct terms for these relationships. I recall reading a piece on the development of small children which noted that Japanese children, who are raised in a culture which places a much greater emphasis on family relationships than does the American culture, are taught the various designations for people at a young age, while American children are learning the names of things.
I detect 'leaf-envy' here, don't I?
Wordwind: THANK YOU!
Holy cow, folks, a
question has actually been
answered! And it wasn't even in Q & Comments...
Sparteye commented
The same distinction is usually unstated but legally important regarding attorneys-at-law and attorneys-in-fact. A lay person who is specifically granted the power of attorney by his principal is an attorney-in-fact, while one with the authority to represent and act for another by operation of law is an attorney-at-law.Thanks for that. I have often (idly) wondered why the term "attorney-at-law" is used in the US. I haven't seen it used anywhere else. Too lazy to look it up, of course.
It makes perfect sense now that you mention it. I have held the power of attorney myself in the past, but never associated it with the other meaning of attorney like that!
Ta!
So, if I give an attorney-at-law a power of attorney to perform a specific action for me rather than generally represent me, does that make him or her an attorney-in-fact?
Bingley
Poor Bing, no one ever answered your last question. Any takers?
Dear consuelo: Here is a URL for State of Alaskabout attorney-in-fact.
http://touchngo.com/lglcntr/akstats/Statutes/Title47/Chapter30/Section952.htmNow all Bingley needs is an attorney to explain it to him, and tell him if it is applicable to the jurisdiction in which he resides.