Dolly Market Forum

I think I mostly prefer the Barbie one, but I like Character Options' (ok, do I put another 's' here, because she's a single figure, or do I only use apostrophe without 's', because the word is plural? Darnit...) coat better, and coats are important, so it's a draw...

(03-01-2020, 11:33 PM)neon_jellyfish Wrote: [ -> ] (...or do I only use apostrophe without 's', because the word is plural? ...) 

I believe you would use only the apostrophe, because, while the figure is single, the word "options" is plural.

However, now that you point it out... since "options" is here being used as part of the description of the single figure...   ...

Perhaps we could ask The Doctor(s) to step back in time a few decades to ask Strunk & White their opinion on this matter.

(03-02-2020, 03:07 AM)davidd Wrote: [ -> ]Perhaps we could ask The Doctor(s) to step back in time a few decades to ask Strunk & White their opinion on this matter.

More people need to consult Strunk & White… Says the person whose phone dictation makes her grammar look terrible.
I think it depends on whether you’re using the words as the doll’s name, or the company’s name. If you are talking about the company’s doll, you would need the apostrophe as a possessive. If it’s the doll’s name then no. Like “Mattel’s Barbie” vs. the Mattel Barbie. “Character Options’ doll” vs. “the Character Options doll”.
...??
Heh, sorry, grammar police.
(and you wouldn’t believe how long it took to post this with all the corrections.)

Anyway, interesting to see the size difference in two 1/6 figures.

(03-02-2020, 03:51 AM)Alliecat Wrote: [ -> ]I think it depends on whether you’re using the words as the doll’s name, or the company’s name. If you are talking about the company’s doll, you would need the apostrophe as a possessive. If it’s the doll’s name then no. Like “Mattel’s Barbie” vs. the Mattel Barbie.  “Character Options’ doll” vs. “the Character Options doll”.

In this case, the question was how to punctuate the possessive that means "the coat belonging to the doll from Character Options."

Neon went with "... the Character Options' coat..." with which I concur... until I start thinking about it. Would "... the Character Options's coat..." have been more grammatically correct in this particular instance? We're not referring to "Character Options" the company, but to a single doll for whom "Character Options" is being used as an identifier. The coat does not belong to Character Options, the company, but rather, to a doll from the Character Options company.

I still think "... the Character Options' coat..." is correct, but I do not think "... the Character Options's coat..." would necessarily be incorrect in this specific case. Odd, perhaps, but not incorrect.

I suppose the really odd thing here is that there are at least three of us among a relatively small handful of active forum members who care about things like this, which is an extremely high percentage compared to the number of people in the public at large who know or care about, or even have the faintest understanding of, apostrophes.

Now I'm curious as to whether the doll hobby on the whole attracts a more literate... or grammatically uptight... crowd than might be exˆpected, or is it just an anomaly here on this forum?

I prefer Character Options. Barbie gets to do so many things. Give someone else a go.

Well that’s what I get for trying to participate here on a tiny phone screen. Somehow the message content just doesn’t come through the same.

I like the Character Options version as well n general. Except the plastic hair. I don’t really like moulded hair on dolls.

Maybe I should search out that version as I really want the outfit for the Pullips to cosplay in.

(03-01-2020, 11:33 PM)neon_jellyfish Wrote: [ -> ]I think I mostly prefer the Barbie one, but I like Character Options' coat better, and coats are important, so it's a draw...

Both coats are equally difficult to get off, if I'm perfectly honest. Character Options' at least attempted to put the lining it, so that does give it the edge. If the coats were easier to remove, I would try giving the Mattel offering the Character Options' one, just to see how it looks. 

(03-02-2020, 03:07 AM)davidd Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-01-2020, 11:33 PM)neon_jellyfish Wrote: [ -> ] (...or do I only use apostrophe without 's', because the word is plural? ...) 

I believe you would use only the apostrophe, because, while the figure is single, the word "options" is plural.

However, now that you point it out... since "options" is here being used as part of the description of the single figure...   ...

Perhaps we could ask The Doctor(s) to step back in time a few decades to ask Strunk & White their opinion on this matter.

If I remember English lessons correctly, if it ended in an 's', you just only used the apostrophe. 

The Doctor has quite terrible grammar herself, so perhaps asking for some help wouldn't be a bad thing :

(03-02-2020, 03:51 AM)Alliecat Wrote: [ -> ]  More people need to consult Strunk & White… Says the person whose phone dictation makes her grammar look terrible.
I think it depends on whether you’re using the words as the doll’s name, or the company’s name. If you are talking about the company’s doll, you would need the apostrophe as a possessive. If it’s the doll’s name then no. Like “Mattel’s Barbie” vs. the Mattel Barbie.  “Character Options’ doll” vs. “the Character Options doll”.
...??
Heh, sorry, grammar police.  
(and you wouldn’t believe how long it took to post this with all the corrections.)

Anyway, interesting to see the size difference in two 1/6 figures.

I wouldn't worry about it - mobile devices make everyone's grammar look terrible, not to mention the addition of horrible spelling!

I was using it as the company name since the doll's name is the same, lol. But.... yeah I think you've got it entirely right. Man, I wish I remembered English lessons a little better, but eh.

The Character Options offering is on a 10" scale, so that ex.plains that size difference. It's also thicker than the Mattel version, but that can be more boiled down to the fact that the Mattel version is some mix of a Pivotal and a Made to Move body. 

(03-02-2020, 04:46 AM)davidd Wrote: [ -> ]I suppose the really odd thing here is that there are at least three of us among a relatively small handful of active forum members who care about things like this, which is an extremely high percentage compared to the number of people in the public at large who know or care about, or even have the faintest understanding of, apostrophes.

Now I'm curious as to whether the doll hobby on the whole attracts a more literate... or grammatically uptight... crowd than might be exˆpected, or is it just an anomaly here on this forum?

I'm figuring that it's a thing unqiue to this forum. We do appear to be quite a literary lot, it stands to reason that pondering over grammar comes along with that. 

I do think there is a connection with books and dolls - considering how many dolls have been made based on a book character, or books that feature a doll as a character - but I think it's more correlation than anything else. 

(03-02-2020, 03:40 PM)Elfy Wrote: [ -> ]I prefer Character Options. Barbie gets to do so many things. Give someone else a go.

If it helps? Character Options seems to be the go to company in the UK for Doctor Who related figures and merch. I believe they're connected to Underground Toys, who appear to be listed on the boxes on the US side of things. 

(03-02-2020, 07:27 PM)Alliecat Wrote: [ -> ]Well that’s what I get for trying to participate here on a tiny phone screen. Somehow the message content just doesn’t come through the same.

It's just unforunate that mobile devices like to mess up. But you still participated and provided good content! 

(03-02-2020, 10:15 PM)Lejays17 Wrote: [ -> ]I like the Character Options version as well n general.  Except the plastic hair.  I don’t really like moulded hair on dolls.

Maybe I should search out that version as I really want the outfit for the Pullips to cosplay in.

It does make sense they would go for plastic hair, as this is basically a larger versions of the 5.5" action figure, with fabric clothing, but I have to admit to preferring the Mattel offering's rooted hair. Even if it is heavily gelled into place. 

I should say that the Character Options version is about 10" tall, but wide, and the boots are non-removeable. This could help make your decision. Oh, also the Mattel offering was recently on sale but I'm not sure where would stock it... 

- - - 

62. Sewing: New Dungarees



Did a bit of sewing lately! Made these dungarees for Hayley. I really should have added a pocket or something to them, but eh, for what they are they're not bad. Importantly, she can sit down in them which is always a bonus.

Squee, mint with polka dots looks so great on Hayley! Nice job!

What confused me about possessive forms is that according to what I was taught, you only put apostrophe to words that end with 's', but if it's a name of an individual person, like James or Chris, the second 's' should be there, and it should be pronounced with the second 's'. University of Bristol, Faculty of Arts states that "both are acceptable. Whichever you decide to use, make sure you are consistent. The university English department's style guide recommends that proper nouns that end in -s form their possessive form by adding -'s. The exceptions to this rule are proper nouns that are Latin or Greek in origin." Grammarly.com says both options are correct. In conclusion, I'm fine with both, and prefer Character Options' without the additional 's', since that one is technically a plural.

Hayley looks adorable, sassy, confident, and all-round awesome in her new dungarees and the related ensemble! Spunky li'l thing!

You made those? They're amazing!

They are so cool! Hayley is a lucky thing to get them.

And I’ll agree that they need a pocket on the bib - those types of pants always seem to have it.

(03-03-2020, 01:59 AM)neon_jellyfish Wrote: [ -> ]Squee, mint with polka dots looks so great on Hayley! Nice job!

Ah, thank you! They're little stars, not polka dots, but I am noticing they don't really photograph like that. 

Glad you were able to come to a conclusion about grammar. I just need to admit to mine being shoddy at best.

(03-03-2020, 12:15 PM)davidd Wrote: [ -> ]Hayley looks adorable, sassy, confident, and all-round awesome in her new dungarees and the related ensemble! Spunky li'l thing!

They help so much in her main aim of messing about. She's never going to complain about something that does that.

(03-03-2020, 02:19 PM)Elfy Wrote: [ -> ]You made those? They're amazing!

Thank you! Still needs a pocket, though.

(03-03-2020, 05:08 PM)Lejays17 Wrote: [ -> ]They are so cool!  Hayley is a lucky thing to get them.

And I’ll agree that they need a pocket on the bib - those types of pants always seem to have it.

Yeah, I just don't think I've got any of that fabric left. Hm. Will need to look. 

- - - 

63. Sewing: New Top



Found that a pair of SnapStars shorts fitted Ademetus perfectly, so I went about trying to make him a little top as well. Admittedly? It's not the best I could have done - it would work better as a little waistcoat than a top. But hey, different outfit for him now.

You're on the roll! I need to learn from you and pick up sewing speed... The new outfit complements his eyes

I would think it would be challenging to sew in such a small scale! Fantastic skill to have!