Trader Joe's, plural

[tongodeon]

dianec42 wants to know what the plural of "Trader Joe's" is

Comments

[glaucon]

move the apostophe to the right of the "s":
Trader Joes'

[mister_borogove]

That would be fine if the singular were "Trader Joes" rather than "Trader Joe's".

[merde]

that doesn't pluralize it. that turns it into a possessive.

[merde]

i should elaborate on this. basically, what "Trader Joes'" implies is that there are multiple Traders Joe, and that the stores belong to them.

[rwx]

In your 'for bonus points' question, your grade school instinct is completely correct. c.f. Chapter 7 of the Chicago Manual of Style for details, although most other books have the same rule of pluralizing words that end in -s by adding -es to it. (With some exceptions for words from foreign languages.)

[mister_borogove]

'"Trader Joe's" stores'

[stoat]

My vote is that, like "moose" or "deer", "Trader Joe's" is both proper singular and proper plural.

[cdk]

I agree. Whose grocery store is this? It's Trader Joe's. Whose grocery stores are these? They're Trader Joe's.

[occlupanid]

I think most of these grammar rules were created in an era before everything became branded and logoized. Perhaps somebody in Chicago can get on to making some new standards?

As for myself, if i can't figure it out, i just end it like i would with more than one radius. Baskin Robbii. 31 Flavii. No, it's not correct, but sounds better than "Flavorses".

[bsdcat]

It's not a simple matter of "the modern era."

Here's a sentence: "I have been to John's."

Here's another sentence: "I have been to many of John's."

In both cases, the thing possessed is implied - "I have been to John's [house]." "I have been to many of John's [parties]."

I would argue that we treat Trader Joe's as Trader Joe's [store(s)], which means that the plurality is only implied.

[merde]

can i just say that i feel like going on a tri-state shooting spree every time i see someone "cleverly" pluralize a word by adding two i's to the end of it? yes, i know you're just goofing around here, but way too many people seem to think this is actually right. i suspect it derives from the common misconception that the "correct" plural of "penis" is "penii".

in fact, "penis" derives from a latinate root (either French or directly from Latin); the proper plural is "penes". pluralizing with an "i", as in "octopi", is only correct for words with greek roots, and you only for christ's sake add one "i", not two. dammit.

[occlupanid]

as a staunch defender of the term "octopuses", i hereby condone, accept, and welcome your shooting spree.