by Gullscorer » 03 May 2014, 19:59
No, he's correct; trust me, I'm a self-appointed expert. If a singular word ends with a ' s ', then in the plural form the word ends ' s's ', but (since the second ' s ' here is somewhat redundant) can also end ' s' ', thus Phillips's or Phillips', but definitely not Phillip's.
No, he's correct; trust me, I'm a self-appointed expert. If a singular word ends with a ' [color=#0040FF]s [/color]', then in the plural form the word ends ' [color=#0040FF]s's[/color] ', but (since the second '[color=#0040FF] s[/color] ' here is somewhat redundant) can also end ' [color=#0040FF]s'[/color] ', thus [color=#0040FF]Phillips's[/color] or [color=#0040FF]Phillips'[/color], but definitely not [color=#0040FF]Phillip's[/color].