Which of the following is correct:
Journalists' Solidarity Forum
Journalist Solidarity Forum
Asked
Active
Viewed 211 times
-4
-
2
- is right, not 2.
– Kris Aug 19 '13 at 07:56 -
Thank you, Kris. I am still not sure why the second option is incorrect. – seeeker Aug 19 '13 at 07:58
-
Is 'Journalists Solidarity' correct? – seeeker Aug 19 '13 at 10:31
-
1This question appears to be off-topic because it is better suitaed to [ell.se] – TrevorD Aug 19 '13 at 11:47
2 Answers
0
If you are referring to the formal name of an organisation, website, journal, etc., then you should follow the style adopted by the organisation, publication, etc..
If it is not the formal name of recognised group or publication, then it is a mere description, and it is therefore inappropriate to capitalise the description because it is not a recognised name.
Before answering, I did search to check whether is it a formal recognised name, but found nothing so I am basing my answer on the assumption that it is not a recognised name.
I assume that you are referring to:
a solidarity forum for/of journalists, or to
a forum for the solidarity of journalists.
In either case, the solidarity forum belongs to the journalists, so you need to use the plural form (more than one journalist) and the possesive form (belonging to). Therefore:
- journalist solidarity forum - wrong x2 - not plural, not possesive
- journalists solidarity forum - wrong x1 - plural, but not possesive
- journalist's solidarity forum - wrong x1 - possesive, but not plural
- journalists' solidarity forum - correct - plural and possesive
[You might find English Language Learners better for this kind of question.]
-
You're incorrect on the plural always being correct, "Journalist Solidarity Forum" uses journalist as a noun-adjunct and so should not be plural. – Jon Hanna Aug 19 '13 at 14:52
-
@JonHanna I did wonder whether it was the formal name of an organisation, etc. and hence first searched for it, but found nothing. For that reason, I prefaced my answer with my assumptions (and have now edited it to amplify those assumptions). In the absence of it being the formal recognised name of an exiting organisation or publication, I stand by my answer. I accept that "Journalist Solidarity Forum" would be perfectly acceptable as a formal name, but I question whether that format would be standard usage for a mere description, as distinct from a name. – TrevorD Aug 19 '13 at 16:18
0
Journalists' Solidarity Forum
This uses Journalist in the plural genitive form.
Journalist Solidarity Forum
This uses Journalist as a noun-adjunct, that is to say using a noun sense as an adjective or adverb (in this case an adjective; modifying the noun phrase "solidarity forum").
As such, both are correct, and both mean much the same thing. Both forms are found in practice.
A more doubtful form would be:
? Journalists Solidarity Forum
This uses a plural as a noun adjunct, which many would argue was incorrect but is sometimes found in names that started in the first form, and then lost the apostrophe at some point. In all though, best avoided.
Now, either would be grammatically correct and of the same meaning, but the latter form is becoming more common generally as genitives are less and less common in names (a matter of fashion more than of correctness), so I'd lean toward recommending it. If used descriptively rather than a title, I'd favour the former as less ambiguous in possible parsing; that is while one could both say "PEN International serves as a journalist solidarity forum as well as supporting other writers" and "PEN International serves as a journalists' solidarity forum as well as supporting other writers" the latter is more graceful.
Jon Hanna
- 53,363