Evidence My Possessive Obsession Is Warranted

I have a friend who is a copy editor at the New York Times. I’ve begun to think of her as my “grammar consultant” (and she will probably be acknowledged as such in my dissertation). I e-mailed her the other day to ask her opinion about the possessive of “Red Sox,” something I’ve discussed here and asked about on Twitter. She didn’t know off the top of her head what the NYT style is and suggested I try to avoid it as much as possible. Unfortunately, I can’t avoid this quandary throughout my dissertation. My advisor asked me to consult Chicago and MLA, but they’re no help either.

Enter Google Reader, and this blog entry from NYT‘s “Bats” Blog: “Needing Snack, Red Sox’ Pedroia Hits Concession Stand.” I feel vindicated! The “x” makes it a colloquial plural, and Red Sox’s just looks weird. Maybe this is the exception that proves the rule?

This is how I know my dissertating phase is on its way to being over. I am sweating details like this obsessively.

I swear I’ll write about non-Sox content soon. But you should really check out the above-linked story. It’s a great example of the “summer camp” feel that Spring Training coverage has in the beginning. Everyone is loose and willing to ask ridiculous questions about a player ducking out of the clubhouse to grab a few hot dogs. Plus, you have to love that Terry Francona asks, “What did the little rat do?” in reference to Pedroia.

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Academia, Forced March, journalism, Red Sox Nation

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s