Advertising - LEO without ads? LEO Pur
LEO

It looks like you’re using an ad blocker.

Would you like to support LEO?

Disable your ad blocker for LEO or make a donation.

 
  •  
  • Forum home

    Language lab

    20 years (of) experience OR 20 years' experience

    Topic

    20 years (of) experience OR 20 years' experience

    Comment
    Which of these sentences is correct? Please remedy my confusion...
     
    1 / He has more than 20 years experience as a bartender
    OR
    2 / He has more than 20 years' experience as a bartender
    OR
    3 / He has more than 20 years of experience as a bartender
    AuthorSDA (474510) 06 Mar 18, 13:19
    Comment
    #1 is the most common option, imo.
    #1Author dude (253248) 06 Mar 18, 15:31
    Comment
    But #1 is also wrong.
    #2 is correct and idiomatic, while #3 is also grammatically correct but I, for one, would be less inclined to use it than #2.
    #2Author Spike BE (535528) 06 Mar 18, 16:13
    Comment
    Maybe I should have elaborated. If you omit the number, for example, "s/he has years of experience" is the only correct way to say or write this. But I think with a number, people often get confused. They frequently add "worth" into the mix because of that: 20 years' worth of experience, e.g. The reason I think #1 is the most common option (wrong or right) is because most people (at least in my experience) abhor (or at least don't like) dangling apostrophes.
    #3Author dude (253248) 06 Mar 18, 16:24
    Comment
    I agree with Spike. (1) is wrong because of the missing apostrophe. (2) is right. (3) isn't wrong but is less common.

    The apostrophe isn't dangling, it's just how English forms the plural possessive.
    #4Author hm -- us (236141) 06 Mar 18, 20:01
    Comment
    Unlike the construction with of, the genitive by itself only seems to work with time – not mass, distance, volume, etc.
     
    Three years of experience
    Eight inches of rain
    Two pounds of apples
    Two pints of beer
    #5AuthorMikeE (236602) 07 Mar 18, 01:42
    Comment
    I don't know how stupid you think I am, hm, but apparently my IQ barely seems to rate above room temperature in your eyes. I know how the plural possessive is formed. I also know the apostrophe isn't dangling; I just called it that because I wanted to. It seemed very apropos to me because that's what it looks like to me: an apostrophe dangling above a period. Is everything 100 percent formal and serious 100 percent of the time with you? Do you never veer from the straight and narrow when it comes to language? Gee, how exciting life must be that way.

    As far as wrong, right, and common goes, all I can say is I read a lot, every day, and all sorts of people's writings. I do it for a living, and I am simply reporting my observations, and they are that, in this case, the apostrophe is more often missing than not. As to why it's missing: I was merely taking a guess. Who knows what the real reason is. I don't.

    Once again, maybe I should have just overloaded my previous posts with smileys to make myself better understood. It's moments like this when I just want to stay away from this forum for good.
    #6Author dude (253248) 07 Mar 18, 03:01
    Comment
    @5: Did you notice, however, that in the present case the genitive works the other way round (and is, in fact, a different genitive)?
    Eight inches of rain, three pints of beer*), three years of experience = a certain quantity of X.
    Three years' experience = the experience of three years = X of a certain quantity.

    *) one additional pint included for dude (come on! santé!)
    #7Author sebastianW (382026) 07 Mar 18, 03:24
     
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  
 
 
 
 
 ­ automatisch zu ­ ­ umgewandelt