0

What is the difference between possessives using an apostrophe, like "God's name" and using "of," like "name of God"?

Other languages consistently use the "of" version, but English seems to do both:

  • the peak of Mt. Everest
  • Mt. Everest's peak

Why? Is there a difference?

Andy Bonner
  • 5,752
Masoud B
  • 33
  • 1
  • 6
  • Here, they're not the same. Doing a kind act in the name of God means for a spiritual reason, not because God's name is Allah or another title. Anna's name is Anna, but here the name is the purpose, the allegiance, or swearing by the power of God. – Yosef Baskin Feb 03 '22 at 19:59
  • 1
    Welcome! The examples might be distracting from your main question. As Yosef points out, "name" is a problematical example because "in the name of" is its own phrase with its own meaning (e.g. "Stop in the name of love"). Perhaps your question is "Why, when Spanish, French, etc. show possession using "of", like "el coche de Julio", and when English typically uses an apostrophe, like "Julio's car," why does it also sometimes use an "of" construction, like "the peak of Mt. Everest," seemingly interchangeably with "Mt. Everest's peak"? – Andy Bonner Feb 03 '22 at 20:10
  • In your example, they are saying the same thing; they are ejaculations. – Steve Feb 03 '22 at 21:04
  • @AndyBonner, yes. exactly dear Andy. – Masoud B Feb 03 '22 at 23:21
  • so if it is own phrase, lets try another example.
    1. spoon of freedom vs 2. freedom spoon. are they same? I think so. if no, why? and if yes, why people just use the first form?
     – Masoud B Feb 03 '22 at 23:33
  • @MasoudB Maybe edit your question and change your example? – Araucaria - Him Feb 04 '22 at 00:18
  • Since you confirm, I've taken the liberty of editing your question. If I haven't represented your thoughts accurately, feel free to revert the edit or make more changes yourself. – Andy Bonner Feb 04 '22 at 02:49

1 Answers1

2

Modern English almost never uses the "___ of ___" construction to indicate simple possessive relationship between two distinct things, like "the sandwich of Jim" or "the desk of my boss." The few exceptions that spring to mind are phrases that were established long ago, and perhaps imported from other languages, like "the hammer of Thor" or "Mother of God."

"The peak of Everest"/"Everest's peak" is a different situation. Although the 's possessive can be called into service here, this is not a relationship between two different things, but expresses a part of a whole. English uses the "___ of ___" construction for this often. "The tip of my tongue," "the bottom shelf of the refrigerator," "the roots of the tree." For this usage, we can often use a possessive construction interchangeably ("the tree's roots"), though some phrases have become entrenched in one usage (there's nothing wrong with "my tongue's tip," but "the tip of my tongue" is more common).

Finally, just to confuse things, we also encounter some "___ of ___" constructions that are not possessives or parts of a whole. "The day of judgement," "the Cape of Good Hope," "the pick of destiny." In this construction, "of" means "characterized by," or "associated with." These do not tend to convert to the 's construction.

Andy Bonner
  • 5,752
  • so it seems, some times common usage is wrong. especially it happens in translate from other languages. for example, recently some palestinian prisoners, escaped by just a spoon. then, an artist made a statue and named it, ملقعه(=spoon) + الحریحه(=freedom). so how to do you translate it? 1. spoon of freedom 2. freedom spoon 3. freedom's spoon – Masoud B Feb 04 '22 at 11:56
  • I think, in Arabic (and also Persian) we can make a phrase with more then one mean.(at the same time). but we are not able in English. it causes problems in translating. is it true? – Masoud B Feb 04 '22 at 12:02
  • Not duplicative? eg mRotten: 'When the owner is a living entity, the prepositional phrasing is technically correct, but the possessive apostrophe is highly preferred.' – Edwin Ashworth Feb 04 '22 at 13:00
  • @EdwinAshworth Yeah, yikes, I only noticed the proposed duplicate after editing and answering. Though tbh I don't hold a high level of conviction about the distinctions I just proposed, and all those outlined there also seem rife with exceptions. All boil down to little more than observations about habituated idiomatic practice—"tend to," "is preferred," "doesn't usually." Also interesting that the proposed duplicate question fears being a duplicate of another, and was flagged as a proposed duplicate of a third. Yikes! – Andy Bonner Feb 04 '22 at 13:49
  • @EdwinAshworth And I don't know that I agree with the distinction about living entities. "Jim's sandwich" > "the sandwich of Jim." But "Boston's metro" > "the metro of Boston." Seems to me it's more about distinguishing between possessive relationships vs the associative relationships e.g. "Museum of Naval History." – Andy Bonner Feb 04 '22 at 13:51
  • @MasoudB Certainly, phrases can have more than one interpretation, which can be lost in translation. But this can be true in English as well. If you titled the sculpture "The Spoon of Freedom," then a viewer could take it to mean "the spoon that has to do with freedom" or "the spoon belonging to 'Freedom' (personified as if a character)." Note, "freedom spoon" can have the "associated with" meaning but can not be used for possessives. – Andy Bonner Feb 04 '22 at 13:55
  • 1
    The attributive usage also complicates ('the Boston Metro') in many cases, and can even hybridise with the Saxon genitive, leading to new words ('working mens club'). // Don't confuse 'possessive' (relating to grammatical form, cf 'nominative', eg 'a day's march') with 'denoting true ownership ('Graham's car' / 'the car of Graham')'. – Edwin Ashworth Feb 04 '22 at 16:26