Yes, this argument does have a basis in linguistic fact, which is why some people do it in the first place, but that doesn't mean it must be correct in Standard English (and it isn't).
This argument does hold water in the linguistic sense. "My wife and I" is, in fact, a phrase — a syntactic constituent. The fact that this ...
This site states it very well:
A less-often faced decision involves the use of apostrophes where multiple owners are named. Where two or more people own one item together, place an apostrophe before an "s" only after the second-named person. For example:
Incorrect: Bill's and Mary's car was a lemon, leading them to seek rescission of their ...
You are right. If the distillery is jointly possessed by the poets and painters then you only need the apostrophe after Painters.
Similarly, John and Mary's house is the house owned jointly by John and Mary. If John and Mary each have their own houses, then you need apostrophes after both possessive nouns: John's and Mary's houses. Note, however, that to ...
According to The Grammar Bible by Michael Strumpf (page 29), in a section on "Possessive Case":
Sometimes possession is shared by several nouns. In these cases, just make the last word in the series possessive.
America and Canada's timber resources are dwindling
Thomas and French's discovery shocked the world.
Leslie and Eric's lasagna is to ...
I am married, I share things with my spouse for instance, a house. But there are some things we don't share.
For example I have a small blue Fiat car while my spouse has a green Jaguar sports car. If I were to express this idea using the same construction as in the OP's question, I would obtain the following:
My wife and I's car.
My wife and I's ...
If you reverse the persons mentioned in your sentence, then you get:
My native language and yours have co-existed for hundreds of years.
This is a perfectly grammatical sentence. Good manners dictate that we mention ourselves last, hence the more polite form you suggest Yours/Your and my native languages have co-existed for hundreds of years, which could ...
The OED’s definition 3 of yours is ‘Used instead of your before another possessive, etc. qualifying the same noun. Now rare or obsolete.’ An illustrative citation is Joseph Addison’s from 1710, ‘I suppose you know, that I obeyed your's, and the Bishop of Clogher's commands.’ (Note the apostrophe, incidentally.)
As you have said, the written record tells us ...
"X and Y's wedding" would mean the wedding was between X and Y; "X's and Y's wedding" would refer to two distinct weddings.
Comma sense—the fun-damental guide to punctuation (Richard Lederer and John Shore) contains the following note about the usage of the apostrophe in such cases:
If two or more people possess the same thing, you need only to put the ...
I'm sure more could be said about this, but I'll say something briefly so that you have a timely answer.
You can get an answer by thinking about the coordination. According to some theories of grammar (all, in my experience), in order to coordinate two phrases, they need to be of the same type (I have a somewhat technical concept of type in mind, but you ...
In my view, this question has three dimensions—one focused on logic, one concerned with style-guide preferences, and one emphasizing real-world usage.
The logic dimension
As a matter of logic, the answer in this exchange:
"Who ate the pie I left on the table to cool?"
"John's or Mary's dog."
has less ambiguity than the answer in this exchange:
That is saying that the firm is now out of business, or at least is no longer serving customers.
That says that the reports were both jointly authored by both of those two people, not that one was one’s and the other the other’s. Both parts need to be possessive if they are not shared.
That is the wrong verb altogether; one lays eggs, but one lies down. ...
It comes back to our old friends, the possessive pronouns (my, our, your, his, her, its, and their), which qualify nouns (my native language), and their independent (aka absolute) forms (mine, ours, yours, his, hers, its, and theirs), which subsume the nouns (mine).
If we progressively subsume the noun language:
Your native language and my native ...
It isn't really difficult, just make sure they work in both positions and your sentence is correct, therefore:
This meeting requires Tom's attendance.
This meeting requires my attendance.
This meeting requires my and Tom's attendance.
This meeting requires Tom's and my attendance.
The simple rule of thumb I learned for this case:
Remove the 'other' and leave the I/me part. If it sounds right with only the I/Me part then the sentence is correct for the standard use of English.
I's seafood collaboration dinner. How does it look?
(I's/) My seafood collaboration dinner. How does it look?
presto! instant easy.
The grammatical form of the sentence you indicate is certainly
She is a friend of Jane and Tom's.
meaning that they both know her and are her friends. However, particularly when speaking, the final "s" happens to be overlooked.
With reference to Jay's answer, the option She's a friend of Jane's and Tom's indicates that they are both friends to this ...
"She's a friend of Jane and Tom" is correct. The "of" applies to "Jane and Tom" as a compound.
You could also say, "She's Jane's and Tom's friend."
People sometimes say, "She's a friend of Jane's and Tom's." But this is redundant: The "of" already indicates possession; you don't need to also use the "'s".
I assume the fact that OP's example specifies addresses in the plural means that Chris and Claire have separate email addresses.
Thus the phrase is actually a contraction of "Chris' email address and Claire's email address", so both apostrophes are valid (I personally would write Chris's, but opinions may differ on that).
When using them separately, we'd use-
John Wichel Foundation's grant...
When using them together, combining them with an 'and'-
...your and John Wichel Foundation's grants...
... which, when placed into the context of this sentence, would be-
"Because of your and the John Wichel Foundation’s grants, we are able to continue our mission to ...
My solution. “The house of John or that of Mary” can be rewritten as
John's house or Mary's
Under the subheading compounds with pronouns, Wikipedia suggests a similar word order when comparing the success of two novels
Was She's success greater, or King Solomon’s Mines's?
Likewise, the OP's real concern: "the Social Worker['s] or Attorney's employee ...
It should be "Mary's and your house" (note the change of order for the owners). http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/apostro.asp .
I think it should be "John's, Mary's and my house" or "John and Mary's and my house" but the later implies that John and Mary are connected in some way in addition to the joint house ownership.
However, if possible I would ...
First start by referring to the linked question (possible duplicate).
The singular use of philosophy suggests that this is a shared (or joint) possession and only the final possessive inflection should be used. If they are actually distinct philosophies, then you should show the possessive inflection for both, but philosophy should be pluralized, also.
Whenever you want to write "he/him and me/I", reverse the two pronouns and see if it sounds right.
Also, omit the "he/him" and see what that sounds like.
Your sentence would read "The project belongs to I and my partner" (obviously wrong), or "The project belongs to I" (obviously wrong).
Another idea: Write out both cases:
"Attached to this email is ...
If you want to communicate that John and Becky both possess the same knowledge (i.e., you're referring to the idea that they both possess knowledge about English grammar), then you'd add an apostrophe onto just the last person listed (e.g., John and Becky's knowledge).
If you want to communicate that John and Becky possess different knowledge (i.e., you're ...