In the US, we tend to add both plural and possessive s for proper names, since otherwise you can't tell whether the word is plural or possessive in speech. If I mention the Grimms tales, someone might thing I am referring to the tales collected by a certain Grimms, as the Yeats poems in "The Wind Among the Reeds" are the poems written by a certain Yeats. "The" plus possessive apostrophe s indicates that "Grimms" is plural (without the "the" it could still be singular: Yeats's poems). "The" pluralizes by itself, as in French, where we speak of "les Thibauld." The pluralizing s merely confirms it, and the 's which follows makes the name possessive and not attributive. The old rule that you don't need an apostrophe-following s after an ancient name is loosely connected to this point: ancient names are treated as commanding universal recognition, and in that sense as being like common nouns, and not more obscure proper nouns.
I now realise that I have spoken the phrase far more often than I have written it. Definitely "Grimms Fairy Tales" and I suppose I would put the apostrophe after the "S".
In aggregate I use the pluralizing apostrophe, but usually I'm talking about one specific story or another, in which case it is a tale from the Brothers Grimm. From, not of.
The titles of the earliest English editions, as far as I've been able to find out by browsing online library catalogues (hey - it's Saturday night!), use phrases such as "from the collection of", or "from oral tradition". That's in the 1820s, and the pair are referred to as "MM. Grimm". (Why French rather than German, I'm not sure.) Around mid-century the phrase "Brothers Grimm" appears, but in the 1890s we start getting books with "Grimm's" in the title, almost without exception in the singular, even when the subtitle makes it clear that there are two of them. E.g. in 1890: Grimm's Kinder- und Hausmärchen. Being a selection of the choicest fairy tales by the Brothers Grimm. With explanatory notes by W. J. Hickie. In that case, Jacob is listed as the "main author" in the catalogue. It's odd.
No. In the first case, the s marks the genitive singular. In the second case the s marks the nominative plural and the apostrophe is a sign indicated there would be a genitive s, if there wasn't already a plural in s. The apostrophe certainly never marks a plural per se. It is used to differentiate the genitive from the plural in s.
"Grimms' Tales" is my most usual term. Sometimes "Grimms' Fairy Tales", but they are about a lot of non-fairy things, so it doesn't feel exactly right.
I grew up with the stories in german, which led me to think, it would be "Die Märchen der Gebrüder Grimm" (the fairy tales/stories of the brothers Grimm) but in fact just "brothers Grimm" seems more commonly used ("Gebrüder" is an old form of saying "brothers" in german, one can see it on old shop signs shortened to "Gebr."). My parents had an old book from Oma (one gran) which said it all: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grimms_M%C3%A4rchen (that would be: Grimm´s Fairy Tales or just plain Stories) Since it wasn´t a collection of stories of their own making the whole possessiveness discussion seems a little bit strange to me (but then, I am not a native english speaker and may well use my "´s" wrongly). The full, old form in german of course is a bit heavy to translate (yes, I was one of those who voted for "The Fairy Tales of the Brothers Grimm" in the poll) but I would find it more correct to pronounce the fact, that they had merely collected long existing "Children and House Stories" (Kinder und Hausmärchen) so: "from the Collection of the Brothers Grimm" would perhaps be correct but not so nice having to say each time. Of course they constantly kept working on and changing them, adding and removing expressions and whole tales.
The word "Märchen" itself is diminutive of the old word "Mar" (as I knew it from my gran who still spoke an ancient form of Plattdeutsch; the Altmark variety, therefore not "dütsch") or in other parts "Märe" which would mean tale, story, even news or saga. Almost as in nightmare;) the word "Mar" or "Märe" somehow expresses that it may not be the full and only Truth but still worth hearing. Today it would be "Schwank", I think. Someone lately told me to tell one from where I live. (Will appear on my journal later...)
The 's in English is indeed a little ambiguous. It doesn't always imply authorship or even ownership: sometimes it's merely used in apposition ("Dublin's fair city"); or to imply a rendition or performance ("Olivier's Coriolanus"), for example. But of course, the genitive in German doesn't always imply possession either, does it? (Does it?)
Can you shed any light on the fact that the vast majority of English editions of these tales refer to them as "Grimm's" - which implies that there's only one Grimm involved? That's the real puzzle to me. You will see from the poll results that barely anybody on my friends list preferred this usage.
I've always understood that the 'mare' of nightmare came from a word meaning 'hag' or 'demon' (mara?), rather than story - referring to the succubi/incubi (according to taste) who so inconsiderately lie on one during the hours of darkness. Cf. "hag-rid" for one who has had nightmares (a word picked up by J. K. Rowling of course).
Oh dear, me and grammar...it has always been my Achilles-heel. This is extra funny since Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm were amongst the founders of what is now called Germanistik, meaning the linguistics and philology of the german language.
Weirdly, it was evidently for some years Wilhelm who concentrated more on the tales (Märchen) and also generally started exploring the history of fairy tales while Jacob was working on a german grammar and ethymology. The general opinion of how the brothers worked together implies, that the elder Jacob started out enthusiastically on new territory with Wilhelm following it up by working on meticulously as was the case with the Tales; while his energetic brother had already detected a new field to explore. How exactly that modus can be confirmed, I don´t know but even in obituaries as early as 1871 on Jacob Grimm, he is described as the enthusiastic pioneer who however needed the corrective and moderation of his brother Wilhelm. A matter of evaluation of their different qualities, perhaps?
However, the more one reads into it, as is the case with many a thing, the more ambiguous it gets; for instance as to the question of ownership versus mere collectors, which has been widely discussed amongst Grimm scholars. The answer seems to be a bit of both; they did collect existing tales mainly from a learned lady (Viehmann) of french (huguenotte) origin, who was a tailor by profession and not at all the old farmer´s wife the brothers famously described her as. There were other contributors such as the renowned poet v. Hülse-Drosthoff or the v. Haxthausens.
Also the idea of the brothers being mere collectors of ancient material may have been in parts a pose taken up to please the then fashionable romantic movement and the reading public which was mainly an emerging bourgeoisie. Therefore, the fact that the brothers Grimm kept changing and adding the texts with each new edition was probably due to both criticism from worried parents, the church (all sexually ambiguous texts were largely omitted or changed beyond recognition) as well as scholars of the new language subjects the Grimm brothers were busy creating. In later editions their collection of Tales is called "educational".
I guess, that ethymology is one of the fields where one can most easily fall into traps such as using mere association by resemblance of sound to think there must be an actual connection, where in fact there is none. I was doing just that with "Mar/Märe" and even landed over in horsecountry: what with "Mähre" meaning "old horse" and mainly a female...which brings us back to "hag/megaera", perhaps? It didn´t seem too far-fetched with "nightmare" and (fairy) tale since many of the brother Grimm´s (sic) are rather scary in core content, though they were being made more harmless and child-friendly even by the brothers Grimm themselves (today of course there exists a completely censored version as if kids could handle nothing but pure saccharine). Anyone familiar with the cruelty of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Struwwelpeter doesn´t need to read J.K. Rowling;)
Har, "eine alte Mähr" could actually be both: old saga and mare which makes vague sense if one considers how horses were long the main means of transport...but I drift, as usual (love it;)
Sorry about the privacy settings, I was stalked, so had to. Thanks ever so much (and now I´ll go shut up in a quiet corner).
Oh, and not to forget about our fav. genitive in german (I had to look this one up;) all of these (latin) possibilities exist in german:
* genitivus qualitatis – the genitive refers to a quality: „Ticket zweiter Klasse“, „eine Freude kurzer Dauer“ (a second-class ticket, a shortlived joy) * genitivus partitivus – : the genitive expresses the relation of a participation: „der älteste Sohn der Familie“, „die andere Seite der Medaille“, „der Süden des Landes“ (the eldest son of the family, the other side of the medal, the south of the country) * genitivus subiectivus – the genitive-object is the source of an action: „der Rat des Freundes“, „die Reaktion des Körpers“ (the friend´s advice, the reaction of the body) * genitivus obiectivus – the genitive-object is the destination of an action: „Beachtung der Gesetze“, „die Bestrafung des Verräters“ (compliance with the law, the punishment of the traitor) * genitivus explicativus / definitivus – the genitive explains or describes another object explicly: „Strahl der Hoffnung“, „die Strafe der Verbannung“, „Besitzer des Hauses“ (the ray/beacon of hope, the punishment of being banished, owner of the house) * genitivus hebraicus – the genitive heightens the importance of the object and emphasizes its quality of highest degree: „das Buch der Bücher“ (the book of books) * genitivus auctoris – the genitive expresses authorship: „Beethovens 1. Symphonie“ (Beethoven´s first symphony)
I'd look it up to check the precise wording - but I think I'd go with Household Tales, as my Peake-illustrated Picador edition is called that. And is by the Brothers Grimm, which offers a new set of problems...
The Brothers Grimm's Household Tales The Brothers Grimms' Household Tales The Brothers' Grimm Household Tales
... which would probably default to Household Tales of The Brothers Grimm.
I think I have the Routledge/Zipes version somewhere.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
no subject
Disagree!
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Grimms' = possessive, a thing belonging to two, plural Grimms. Location of the apostrophe produces the plural.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
My parents had an old book from Oma (one gran) which said it all:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grimms_M%C3%A4rchen
(that would be: Grimm´s Fairy Tales or just plain Stories)
Since it wasn´t a collection of stories of their own making the whole possessiveness discussion seems a little bit strange to me (but then, I am not a native english speaker and may well use my "´s" wrongly).
The full, old form in german of course is a bit heavy to translate (yes, I was one of those who voted for "The Fairy Tales of the Brothers Grimm" in the poll) but I would find it more correct to pronounce the fact, that they had merely collected long existing "Children and House Stories" (Kinder und Hausmärchen) so: "from the Collection of the Brothers Grimm" would perhaps be correct but not so nice having to say each time. Of course they constantly kept working on and changing them, adding and removing expressions and whole tales.
The word "Märchen" itself is diminutive of the old word "Mar" (as I knew it from my gran who still spoke an ancient form of Plattdeutsch; the Altmark variety, therefore not "dütsch") or in other parts "Märe" which would mean tale, story, even news or saga. Almost as in nightmare;) the word "Mar" or "Märe" somehow expresses that it may not be the full and only Truth but still worth hearing.
Today it would be "Schwank", I think. Someone lately told me to tell one from where I live. (Will appear on my journal later...)
no subject
The 's in English is indeed a little ambiguous. It doesn't always imply authorship or even ownership: sometimes it's merely used in apposition ("Dublin's fair city"); or to imply a rendition or performance ("Olivier's Coriolanus"), for example. But of course, the genitive in German doesn't always imply possession either, does it? (Does it?)
Can you shed any light on the fact that the vast majority of English editions of these tales refer to them as "Grimm's" - which implies that there's only one Grimm involved? That's the real puzzle to me. You will see from the poll results that barely anybody on my friends list preferred this usage.
I've always understood that the 'mare' of nightmare came from a word meaning 'hag' or 'demon' (mara?), rather than story - referring to the succubi/incubi (according to taste) who so inconsiderately lie on one during the hours of darkness. Cf. "hag-rid" for one who has had nightmares (a word picked up by J. K. Rowling of course).
no subject
Weirdly, it was evidently for some years Wilhelm who concentrated more on the tales (Märchen) and also generally started exploring the history of fairy tales while Jacob was working on a german grammar and ethymology. The general opinion of how the brothers worked together implies, that the elder Jacob started out enthusiastically on new territory with Wilhelm following it up by working on meticulously as was the case with the Tales; while his energetic brother had already detected a new field to explore. How exactly that modus can be confirmed, I don´t know but even in obituaries as early as 1871 on Jacob Grimm, he is described as the enthusiastic pioneer who however needed the corrective and moderation of his brother Wilhelm. A matter of evaluation of their different qualities, perhaps?
However, the more one reads into it, as is the case with many a thing, the more ambiguous it gets; for instance as to the question of ownership versus mere collectors, which has been widely discussed amongst Grimm scholars. The answer seems to be a bit of both; they did collect existing tales mainly from a learned lady (Viehmann) of french (huguenotte) origin, who was a tailor by profession and not at all the old farmer´s wife the brothers famously described her as. There were other contributors such as the renowned poet v. Hülse-Drosthoff or the v. Haxthausens.
Also the idea of the brothers being mere collectors of ancient material may have been in parts a pose taken up to please the then fashionable romantic movement and the reading public which was mainly an emerging bourgeoisie. Therefore, the fact that the brothers Grimm kept changing and adding the texts with each new edition was probably due to both criticism from worried parents, the church (all sexually ambiguous texts were largely omitted or changed beyond recognition) as well as scholars of the new language subjects the Grimm brothers were busy creating. In later editions their collection of Tales is called "educational".
I guess, that ethymology is one of the fields where one can most easily fall into traps such as using mere association by resemblance of sound to think there must be an actual connection, where in fact there is none. I was doing just that with "Mar/Märe" and even landed over in horsecountry: what with "Mähre" meaning "old horse" and mainly a female...which brings us back to "hag/megaera", perhaps? It didn´t seem too far-fetched with "nightmare" and (fairy) tale since many of the brother Grimm´s (sic) are rather scary in core content, though they were being made more harmless and child-friendly even by the brothers Grimm themselves (today of course there exists a completely censored version as if kids could handle nothing but pure saccharine).
Anyone familiar with the cruelty of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Struwwelpeter doesn´t need to read J.K. Rowling;)
no subject
I've tried to reply to your message, btw, but your privacy settings won't allow it! The short version is, it's all fine.
On Getting Carried Away
Sorry about the privacy settings, I was stalked, so had to.
Thanks ever so much (and now I´ll go shut up in a quiet corner).
no subject
* genitivus qualitatis – the genitive refers to a quality: „Ticket zweiter Klasse“, „eine Freude kurzer Dauer“
(a second-class ticket, a shortlived joy)
* genitivus partitivus – : the genitive expresses the relation of a participation:
„der älteste Sohn der Familie“, „die andere Seite der Medaille“, „der Süden des Landes“
(the eldest son of the family, the other side of the medal, the south of the country)
* genitivus subiectivus – the genitive-object is the source of an action: „der Rat des Freundes“, „die Reaktion des Körpers“
(the friend´s advice, the reaction of the body)
* genitivus obiectivus – the genitive-object is the destination of an action:
„Beachtung der Gesetze“, „die Bestrafung des Verräters“
(compliance with the law, the punishment of the traitor)
* genitivus explicativus / definitivus – the genitive explains or describes another object explicly:
„Strahl der Hoffnung“, „die Strafe der Verbannung“, „Besitzer des Hauses“
(the ray/beacon of hope, the punishment of being banished, owner of the house)
* genitivus hebraicus – the genitive heightens the importance of the object and emphasizes its quality of highest degree:
„das Buch der Bücher“
(the book of books)
* genitivus auctoris – the genitive expresses authorship: „Beethovens 1. Symphonie“
(Beethoven´s first symphony)
I think, that may be enough german for a day...
no subject
The Brothers Grimm's Household Tales
The Brothers Grimms' Household Tales
The Brothers' Grimm Household Tales
... which would probably default to Household Tales of The Brothers Grimm.
I think I have the Routledge/Zipes version somewhere.
no subject