Print

Print


I copied the picture and enlarged it.

Either the D is bleeding into the S, or
there is an apostrophe there. I think the
latter, given that there is no other bleeding.

Cheers,
Peter.

-----Original Message-----
From: Nancy Gish [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 10:00 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: OT: Further it's


Well then, either the McDonalds (two) did not pay attention to grammar or
the separate lines identify the name and then, separately, the available
(ostensible) food.
Nancy


Date sent:              Wed, 30 Oct 2002 11:09:05 -0500
Send reply to:          "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum."
<[log in to unmask]>
From:                   "Rickard A. Parker" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:                Re: OT: Further it's
To:                     [log in to unmask]

Nancy Gish wrote:

> I do not know the history of how "McDonalds" became a brand name, and
> brand names pay no attention as a rule to rules.  But it could well be
> simply a plural rather than a possessive.  If it simply is the name of a
> family, i.e., the McDonalds, then the possessive would be "Mcdonalds' "
> and would not be in the brand name.

The first McDonalds was owned by two brothers named (what else)
McDonald.
A short history of the early chain, bought out by Ray Kroc, is at
    http://www.fiftiesweb.com/pop/mcdonalds.htm

At the webpage is a picture of the first restaurant and it displays a sign
saying (with no apostrophes):

 MCDONALDS
  FAMOUS
 HAMBURGERS

Regards,
    Rick Parker