1

Which of the following is correct?

Washington biographer Ron Chernow says...

Washington's biographer Ron Chernow says...

The only difference that comes to mind is that the latter implies there are no other Washington biographers, but what if there was only one biographer? Is the latter then preferred over the former, while the former is more appropriate for one of many biographers? Is one always preferred over the other? I've seen both used.

Improve this question
5
  • 2
    The one that is most accurate is preferred. We don't have enough information to make that determination here.
    – Jim
    Commented Nov 14, 2018 at 16:53
  • “British historian Sir Martin Gilbert, official Churchill biographer, dies ...” and “Winston Churchill's biographer, Martin Gilbert, dies” Both forms are used, but adding "official" in the noun phrase makes it clearer.
    – Mari-Lou A
    Commented Nov 14, 2018 at 18:38
  • Are you talking about a biographer who lives in the state of Washington or are you talking about a biographer who is detailing the life of (I assume) George Washington?
    – Jason Bassford
    Commented Nov 14, 2018 at 20:48
  • @JasonBassford George Washington.
    – Zenon
    Commented Nov 14, 2018 at 21:49
  • In the case of a biographer of George Washington, the possessive would only make sense if the person had been appointed by Washington (or a legal representative) as his biographer (at some point).
    – Jason Bassford
    Commented Nov 14, 2018 at 21:54

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
2

If referring to a person (e.g. George Washington; and provided that person is identified prior to the statement in question), "Washington biographer" implies that Ron Chernow was one of possibly several biographers. "Washington's biographer" implies that Ron Chernow was Washington's only [official] biographer.

Improve this answer
0

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .