Apostrophe,
Thou art full of glory and splendour.
How grand you shine,
(thinly veiled rhyme)
as you substitute V for e'er.
For what would don't be
omitting just thee,
but a do and a not? 'Tis true.
And could've, would've,
should've, might've, must've,
all exist because of you.
Thou art not limited,
to language inhibited,
and it's this I'll love all my days.
Possibilities boundless,
in you letters soundless,
like nor'easter takes a T and an H.
For what can I do
but cave in and misuse
our infinite array of words?
How much can be said,
with a nod of the head,
or a ' and a ' and a '?
Most noblest of symbols,
how other ones tremble
in your presence they quake and they cower.
You hang in the air,
'twixt letters, how dare
anyone think they have power
O'er you? For you are alone,
ensconced on your throne,
until eternity unravels.
And then when it does,
with a bang and a buzz,
to you all dead letters travel.
And as they begin
to chop, twist, and blend
together after catastrophe,
You'll create something new,
what else would you do
my forever, lovely Apostrophe?
So I was thinking about words and how I string them together to make sentences. Then I was thinking about letters and how I string them together to make words. Then I was thinking about the apostrophe and how it sometimes replaces letters and I was wondering what it's limits were. I mean, in shorthand, there are no practical limitations, right? I abbreviate government as gov't to this day. There I'm eliminating six letters. How horrible, I think.
And then there's 'ere and e'er. I love these two words. They're beautiful sounding and perfect in function. And the My Morning Jacket song lyric everything'd be great/ everything'd be good/ if everybody gave/ as everybody should. How awesome of a word is everything'd?
Plus, when we speak, we throw around apostrophes like nothing. I suppose this could be a regional phenomenon, varying with location, but still, I'd argue that each brogue has its own clipped words. And I daresay none would disagree with me.
But this has got me wondering, can an apostrophe substitute more than just letters? What about entire words? Could a writer remove all the supplementary text and just leave the meat and potatoes? And who the heck would wanna read it if they did? I, for one, love the constant changing English language. Its rules are baffling and abused, but I'm of the opinion that if a writer can successfully do so, then they have the power to do it, so long as it makes sense. For what are words but things that have power because we collectively give them power? What would the apostrophe be if folks stopped using it?
Just for fun, I tried speaking without contracted words the other day. I didn't last very long. It's too ingrained in my vernacular, I suppose. Just thinking out loud.
Note: I'm not saying I'm for the cutting down of words and letters to get an abbreviated society. This, I fear, would be a dreadful mistake. Personally, I loathe internet language. Things like LOL and BRB drive me crazy. When I get a text message written in complete disregard to the rules, I scratch my head and try to understand. I believe that George Orwell's predicted newspeak from Nineteen Eighty-Four is the very textual way we communicate now. I strive my best to refrain from this, and to respond to these types of messages with complete sentences. Of course, from time to time, I succumb and need to save myself 1.3 seconds of typing by using an abbreviation. Still, for the most part, this sort of thing drives me up the metaphorical wall.
