DeMotivators

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IPD

Except that in this case, the intent was referring to peoples in GENERAL, not people--as a subset of a larger group. So I stand by my assertion that it should be peoples'.

---

Which is exactly why it is correct. The only time peoples' would be acceptable is in the case of talking about specific groups. The British and German peoples' language are not the same.

people's = of (the) people
peoples' = of peoples

It's confusing, and there are different camps of thought. As was said earlier, I don't see it as a big deal. Everyone knows the intent, which is to simply show possession. I use the word "irregardless" all the time. It's not (truly) a word, but who cares? *shrug*

Jeremy

It's not a word, and those who use it are troglodytes.

http://www.quickmeme.com/img/64/6448...1be109fe7c.jpg

if I was black I'd just use the N-word so no one would question me. :)

All this grammar talk is demotivating.

No phuques are given!

http://i.imgur.com/oTnb8Gu.gif

:suspect:

Boeing 777-300

Hahahahahhaa

From the phone.

Reno 911 - Movie PSA - YouTube

watch out nsfw language