\n<\/p>\n
When Taylor Swift announced at the Grammys that the title of her new album would be \u201cThe Tortured Poets Department,\u201d what was your reaction?<\/p>\n
Maybe it was: \u201cMy gosh! Her first new album in more than a year. I can\u2019t wait!\u201d<\/p>\n
Maybe it was: \u201cHo-hum. I\u2019d rather listen to Shostakovich\/Metallica\/Baby Shark.\u201d<\/p>\n
Or, just possibly, it could have been:<\/p>\n
\u201cShouldn\u2019t there be an apostrophe in that title?\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n Yes, plenty of people, upon hearing the biggest music announcement of the year, started thinking about diacritical marks and then talking about them on social media.<\/p>\n \u201cI ruined this album release for my students by making it a lesson on apostrophe usage,\u201d Erin Weinberg<\/a>, an instructor in the department of English, theater, film and media at the University of Manitoba, wrote on X. (Others opined via Reddit<\/a>, TikTok and elsewhere.)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n If you do insist on adding an apostrophe, there are two potential places. It could be before the \u201cS\u201d: The Tortured Poet\u2019s Department. That means the department belongs to just one poet.<\/p>\n \u201cIs it a department just for a single tortured poet, where they can sit alone and write tortured poetry?\u201d Weinberg asked.<\/p>\n Or after the \u201cS\u201d: The Tortured Poets\u2019 Department, a department of many poets. \u201cA designated department where all tortured poets can inspire together?\u201d Weinberg asked.<\/p>\n But the title as it officially reads has no apostrophe: \u201cThe Tortured Poets Department.\u201d It\u2019s like those other great apostrophe-less works of art \u201cDead Poets Society\u201d and \u201cThe Baby-Sitters Club.\u201d In this case, the department does not belong to the poets. \u201cPoets\u201d describes the department.<\/p>\n \u201cNouns can be attributive, which just means we can use them to describe things the same way we use adjectives,\u201d said Mignon Fogarty, the host of the \u201cGrammar Girl\u201d podcast. \u201c\u2018Tortured Poets\u2019 is telling us what kind of department it is, the same way \u2018Cosmetics\u2019 is telling us what kind of department we\u2019re visiting at Macy\u2019s.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n So which way should the title be? Before you decide that a feud<\/a> on the scale of Kanye West versus Taylor Swift is breaking out, be aware that the consensus of professional grammarians is: It\u2019s really up to Swift.<\/p>\n First off, none of the possible titles is wrong. \u201cEach version is grammatically correct, but conveys its own unique meaning,\u201d Weinberg said.<\/p>\n And grammarians say not only that Swift has the choice of which to use, she probably also has chosen the right one for her intended meaning.<\/p>\n \u201cI find the apostrophe-free option to be by far the most appealing and logical option,\u201d said Ellen Jovin, author of \u201cRebel With a Clause: Tales and Tips From a Roving Grammarian.\u201d \u201cI am guessing there are multiple tortured poets, and I understand \u2018poets\u2019 adjectivally. It\u2019s a department of tortured poets. I wouldn\u2019t want an apostrophe there! I trust Taylor Swift\u2019s apostrophe use.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe title is fine without an apostrophe; the Department of Veterans Affairs doesn\u2019t use one,\u201d said Mark Bulik, the assistant standards editor at The New York Times. \u201cWhat\u2019s good enough for the official nomenclature of the United States government should be good enough for Taylor Swift.\u201d<\/p>\n Weinberg likes Swift\u2019s choice as well: \u201cI\u2019d like to think of the tortured poets collectively hanging out together in a department of their own, a space to feel their feelings and write about them in a supportive environment.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n Because Taylor Swift is everywhere and everything these days, you won\u2019t be surprised to learn that this is not the first time she has made grammar-related news.<\/p>\n