Results 1 to 10 of 10

    • Join Date: Nov 2005
    • Posts: 6
    #1

    Question et al's or et als'

    Should I put the apostrophe before or after the s with et al? e.g.

    In support of Alderson et alís (2004) findings...

    Surely this should be et als' as 'Anderson et al' refers to multiple people?

    Thanks,

    Richard.

  1. Barb_D's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Mar 2007
    • Posts: 19,218
    #2

    Re: et al's or et als'

    It's just "et al" - don't try to make it plural.

  2. Offroad's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Brazilian Portuguese
      • Home Country:
      • Brazil
      • Current Location:
      • Brazil

    • Join Date: Feb 2008
    • Posts: 2,817
    #3

    Re: et al's or et als'

    Fully agreed. No need for the 's', however, as it is possible to find 'I seen', it is also possible to find 'et als'.


    • Join Date: Nov 2005
    • Posts: 6
    #4

    Re: et al's or et als'

    Thanks for your replies.

    So 'In support of Alderson et al (2004) findings...' is fine? It just looks a bit wrong without the s.

    Richard.

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Italian
      • Home Country:
      • Italy
      • Current Location:
      • Italy

    • Join Date: Aug 2008
    • Posts: 353
    #5

    Re: et al's or et als'

    Since 'et al.' is short for et alii (= literally "and other persons") why not use a more 'Germanic' solution instead of a Latin phrase?

    'In support of Alderson and other experts'/scholars'/scientists' findings?

  3. Barb_D's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Mar 2007
    • Posts: 19,218
    #6

    Re: et al's or et als'

    I only belated realized you wanted to use that as a possessive. I'd advise not trying to do so.

    The findings of X et al (2004).

  4. #7

    Re: et al's or et als'

    To avoid confusions, I would write like:

    In support of Alderson and colleagues/co-workers' findings [Alderson et al., 2004], ...

    where [Alderson et al., 2004] is a citation. It may also take the form
    (Alderson et al., 2004), [1], (1), etc. depending on the citation style that you use.

    In the "References/Bibliography" section, you will have a reference entry like:

    A. Alderson, B. Smith, C. Jones, and D. Roberts, "Recent Findings on ABC", Journal of XYZ, volume 100, pages 50-60, 2004.

  5. Raymott's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Australia
      • Current Location:
      • Australia

    • Join Date: Jun 2008
    • Posts: 24,091
    #8

    Re: et al's or et als'

    Quote Originally Posted by zeyarag View Post
    In support of Alderson and colleagues/co-workers' findings [Alderson et al., 2004], ...
    In support of Alderson and colleagues' findings (2004), ...
    I don't know of any style guides that would require you to write 'Anderson' twice in this context.
    But this correction is still inferior to Barb's simple solution.

  6. Offroad's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Brazilian Portuguese
      • Home Country:
      • Brazil
      • Current Location:
      • Brazil

    • Join Date: Feb 2008
    • Posts: 2,817
    #9

    Re: et al's or et als'

    Quote Originally Posted by Barb_D View Post
    I only belated realized you wanted to use that as a possessive. I'd advise not trying to do so.

    The findings of X et al (2004).
    I've been researching for almost one decade, and I have never seen an author and his/her colaborators be addressed like that.

    So, I reinforce what Barb has said.

  7. konungursvia's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Canada
      • Current Location:
      • Canada

    • Join Date: Mar 2009
    • Posts: 5,158
    #10

    Re: et al's or et als'

    Quote Originally Posted by marciobarbalho View Post
    I've been researching for almost one decade, and I have never seen an author and his/her colaborators be addressed like that.

    So, I reinforce what Barb has said.
    The findings of X et al. seems fine to me.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •