Someone named Tran? If so, disregard the following:
I assumed you were talking about “the rights of trans folks”, which is usually “trans rights”. In that case, “trans” is an adjective. Like “human” in “human rights”.
If you did want it to be possessive for trans folks, similar to if you said “humans’ rights”, you’d say “trans folks’ rights”.
Because while “human” can be an adjective or a noun, “trans” is only an adjective. So you can call someone “a human”, but not “a trans”.
Technically, you could say ‘a trans,’ but it would fall into the same space as calling someone ‘a gay’ or ‘a black.’ It sounds weird enough to almost be dysphemistic.
It’s close but I don’t think so. A metonym for trans people would be something like ‘IKEA sharks.’ That would be something associated with the group rather than the direct word that names the group. ‘A trans’ is more of an unusual phrasing to create a sort of neologistic ethnonym.
‘A trans’ : ‘a trans person’ :: ‘an american’ : ‘an american person’
I’m indicating possession . The apostrophe belongs there.
Who’s tran?
DOCTOR TRAN
IS A REAL DOCTOR
AND HE’S OFF TO EAT HICKORY-SMOKED HORSE BUTTHOLES
FROM A CUP
Please let me eat breakfast!
You know, Tran Right.
Someone named Tran? If so, disregard the following:
I assumed you were talking about “the rights of trans folks”, which is usually “trans rights”. In that case, “trans” is an adjective. Like “human” in “human rights”.
If you did want it to be possessive for trans folks, similar to if you said “humans’ rights”, you’d say “trans folks’ rights”.
Because while “human” can be an adjective or a noun, “trans” is only an adjective. So you can call someone “a human”, but not “a trans”.
Technically, you could say ‘a trans,’ but it would fall into the same space as calling someone ‘a gay’ or ‘a black.’ It sounds weird enough to almost be dysphemistic.
I think this would be an example of metonymy.
It’s close but I don’t think so. A metonym for trans people would be something like ‘IKEA sharks.’ That would be something associated with the group rather than the direct word that names the group. ‘A trans’ is more of an unusual phrasing to create a sort of neologistic ethnonym.
‘A trans’ : ‘a trans person’ :: ‘an american’ : ‘an american person’
To.me it sounds archiac, like “the Google”
No it doesn’t. Since Trans ends in an s, the correct way to show possession is Trans’
While you normally would be correct, transgender is a adjective, while rights is the noun, so no apostrophe required at all
The number of people that know this is in the thousands
This made me actually laugh out loud.
Then it’s
trans'Transeses’
Shouldn’t it be "trans’ " then ? Idk English is not even my first language, but that’s what I was taught in school
Why are you indicating possession? I don’t see the word “rule(s)” being possessed in any post.