Why does the world now seem fine with putting an apostophe in this sentence:
"I went to the the mall, but couldn't find what I was looking for in any of the store's"
This is horrifying. If you do it, STOP THAT! Whenever I use an apostrophe, I check to see if it makes sense; about 10% of the time I'm wrong, so I FIX IT!!!
posted
While a basic knowledge of punctuation will teach you that, for example aunts is plural while aunt's is either posessive or a contraction of aunt is, the general rules will not teach you the difference between its and it's.
I think there's a world of difference between breaking a rule which requires specific knowledge of that specific word (spelling of individual words, irregular conjugations, etc.), and breaking a general rule which can be applied (mostly) across the board.
Personally, I think the its vs. it's rule is annoying and pointless in addition to being arbitrary. If it were up to me, the apostrophe would be used for both of them.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
You can't have "It's" mean both the possessive and "it is." Therefore the exception, because "its" has no other use than the possessive, except for the rarely used plural form. Being such a short word, doing away with the distinction would lead to confusion among those who are interested in reading more efficiently. You'd have to go back in some situations and re-read the sentence to discern the meaning. Ambiguity is BAD!
Get rid of that little exception and you might as well stop using the apostrophe there at all. Which is just silly!
Edit: I'd be interested to know of any other exceptions to this rule. I believe "it's" and "its" are the only exceptions in the English language. I can't even imagine another.
Edit again: No I take that back, a prof once told me that the only word in English that was traditionally apostrophized in a contraction WITHOUT adding another "s" was the name "Jesus." All other names are contracted thusly: "Chris's" "The Adamsons's House" etc. Whereas, "Jesus' hat" was not "jesus's hat."
Ironically we now usually switch this around and say "Jesus's," and "The Johnsons' House."
I am I switching the whole thing round?
Ok, well it can be confusing I'll admit, but "it's" and "its" are just two simple words.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: I think there's a world of difference between breaking a rule which requires specific knowledge of that specific word (spelling of individual words, irregular conjugations, etc.), and breaking a general rule which can be applied (mostly) across the board.
Personally, I think the its vs. it's rule is annoying and pointless in addition to being arbitrary. If it were up to me, the apostrophe would be used for both of them.
Amen. I don't get why it isn't, actually. I suspect someone made a mistaken once upon a time and decided to declare it a non-mistake.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:the general rules will not teach you the difference between its and it's
Yes, they will.
"It's" = contraction for "it is." "Its" = irregular possessive of "it," much like "his" and "her" and "their."
So once you've learned how to form contractions and memorized the list of irregular possessives, you know all the rules you need to understand proper usage.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tom, a general rule will not teach you exceptions to the rule. You can't just learn "use an apostrophe here"—you also have to learn "and don't use one here, here, and here."
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am fine with using an apostrophe for both. According to the general rule, no apostrophe makes it a plural.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
"It's" can have the possessive meaning, besides being a contraction of "it is". Of course, you'd have to be talking about the possessions of either a demonic clown or a hairy cousin. Posts: 993 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
My pet peeve is the your vs you're. It boggles my mind that people can't understand the difference. When in doubt, break the contraction and see if it fits.
Posts: 1042 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:My pet peeve is the your vs you're. It boggles my mind that people can't understand the difference. When in doubt, break the contraction and see if it fits.
Mine is failure to use quotation marks when a word refers to the word itself instead of the word's referent. Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Considering English's history, irregularity is the norm. It's only later that people start trying to modify word-declensions by analogy with other words.
Posts: 1346 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:My pet peeve is the your vs you're. It boggles my mind that people can't understand the difference. When in doubt, break the contraction and see if it fits.
Mine is failure to use quotation marks when a word refers to the word itself instead of the word's referent.
quote:You can't have "It's" mean both the possessive and "it is."
"Tom's going to the store." "Tom is going to Tom's store."
I think you can.
Of course, Tom's == "Tom is" isn't used much in written English, but it could be, and it would be perfectly understandable.
After all, English has quite a few homonyms which we have to decypher according to usage.
quote:So once you've learned how to form contractions and memorized the list of irregular possessives, you know all the rules you need to understand proper usage.
As Jonathon said, the first is a general rule, but the second is a list of specific, irregular rules.
Wouldn't it be nice if English rules which are specific in nature (such as irregular spellings, any and every case of "ei" or "ie" [despite what that false false false rule we learned in grade school says], and "don't use an apostrophe in its, even though the general rule says you should") were considered optional?
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:You can't just learn "use an apostrophe here"—you also have to learn "and don't use one here, here, and here."
Couldn't the general rule be "don't use an apostrophe to indicate possession for pronouns, because all pronouns are irregular?"
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Wouldn't it be nice if English rules which are specific in nature (such as irregular spellings, any and every case of "ei" or "ie" [despite what that false false false rule we learned in grade school says], and "don't use an apostrophe in its, even though the general rule says you should") were considered optional?
So, what words would you use instead for irregular possessives such as "his", "hers", "mine", "your", "ours", "theirs", etc.?
If "it's" becomes the possessive of "it", are you going to start using "him's", "her's", "me's", "you's", "our's", "them's", etc, and just throw out all irregular possessives?
Improperly using "its" and "it's" is not an appeal to simpler language - it's either ignorance of or denial of a rule of usage.
quote:Couldn't the general rule be "don't use an apostrophe to indicate possession for pronouns, because all pronouns are irregular?"
Applying that rule would lead to at least some errors in one's writing.
The only possessive pronouns that modify nouns (that is, excluding words like "mine" as opposed to "my") and also end in an "s" are "his," "its," and "one's." It's not much of a general rule if it only applies to two instances.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It doesn't matter whether it ends in an "s" or not. That some happen to end in "s" is irrelevant; in this case, "one's" is the ugly exception to an otherwise general rule -- which is that possessive pronouns do not get apostrophes.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:You can't just learn "use an apostrophe here"—you also have to learn "and don't use one here, here, and here."
Couldn't the general rule be "don't use an apostrophe to indicate possession for pronouns, because all pronouns are irregular?"
No, the general rule is "mark possessive nouns with an apostrophe followed by s." Then you need another rule on top of that saying "but don't mark possessive personal pronouns with an apostrophe."
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Isn't that just swapping one exception rule for another, making the exception all pronouns instead of the pronoun "it"?
I guess the new rule could be called a general rule, though. But it's really just a specific rule masquerading as a general rule. And not very general at that.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yep. But it's infinitely more functional and easier to remember, because the ONLY exception to this rule as stated is for the pronoun "one" -- which is almost never used and is easily identified as a special case when it IS necessary to render as a possessive.
Don't punctuate possessive pronouns. It's that simple.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
See, this is where state intervention, if done sensibly, is actually quite nice. It gives you a final arbiter; and if they have any brains, they'll declare a "main form" and a "side form" and you're allowed to use either one, and then you don't have to burn up bandwidth arguing, you can just say "It's a side form" and let it go at that.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: The only possessive pronouns that modify nouns (that is, excluding words like "mine" as opposed to "my") and also end in an "s" are "his," "its," and "one's." It's not much of a general rule if it only applies to two instances.
I'm not sure why you're ignoring on absolute possessive personal pronouns and focusing on the attributive ones. Could you clarify?
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Don't punctuate possessive pronouns. It's that simple.
I'm going to pick and say don't punctuate possessive personal pronouns. There are lots of other kinds of pronouns. Many of them do not form possessives (like "that" and "what" and "whichever"), but some do (like "each other" and "somebody"). I'm also not sure if "one" is technically a personal pronoun or is something else, but I'd have to double-check on that.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: But you have to trust that state intervention will be done with any brains.
Well, my suggested solution is indeed precisely what happened in Norway, so it has been done in the past.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
So this proposed rule becomes "don't use an apostrophe with possessive personal pronouns, but do use an apostrophe with other possessive pronouns", which seems almost as arbitrary as "don't use an apostrophe for possession on the pronoun it", with the added burden of being more complicated.
It is simpler to understand that its is possessive than to understand that it's is a possessive personal pronoun.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't see how knowing that "its" is possessive helps you know whether it needs an apostrophe.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by FlyingCow: Improperly using "its" and "it's" is not an appeal to simpler language - it's either ignorance of or denial of a rule of usage.
quote:Improperly using "its" and "it's" is not an appeal to simpler language - it's either ignorance of or denial of a rule of usage.
Why can't it be both?
I deny that it's a worthwhile rule of usage. For simplicity's sake, I think that English would be better off without it.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jon Boy: I don't see how knowing that "its" is possessive helps you know whether it needs an apostrophe.
Well, you also have to know that the possessive form of "its" does not use an apostrophe.
Just like you'd also have to know that it's the personal pronouns that don't use apostrophes, while others do.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: See, this is where state intervention, if done sensibly, is actually quite nice. It gives you a final arbiter; and if they have any brains, they'll declare a "main form" and a "side form" and you're allowed to use either one, and then you don't have to burn up bandwidth arguing, you can just say "It's a side form" and let it go at that.
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: But you have to trust that state intervention will be done with any brains.
quote:Originally posted by King of Men:
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: But you have to trust that state intervention will be done with any brains.
Well, my suggested solution is indeed precisely what happened in Norway, so it has been done in the past.
Yeah, but this is the country where the president agreed that the year 2000 must be the first year of the twenty-first century, because the majority thought it was and majority rules. Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jon Boy: I don't see how knowing that "its" is possessive helps you know whether it needs an apostrophe.
Well, you also have to know that the possessive form of "its" does not use an apostrophe.
Just like you'd also have to know that it's the personal pronouns that don't use apostrophes, while others do.
The first rule follows from the second. "It" is in the class of personal pronouns, so it doesn't need an apostrophe in its possessive form.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
My point is that more people who aren't as familiar with grammar as you are will be able to identify "its" as possessive than as a possessive personal pronoun.
Heck, I'm not sure I know exactly what makes something a personal pronoun or not.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Icarus: Yeah, but this is the country where the president agreed that the year 2000 must be the first year of the twenty-first century, because the majority thought it was and majority rules.
Since the numbering of centuries is totally conventional anyway, I think it perfectly reasonable to let the majority rule. Honestly, who cares that there was no year 0? The point is that the 19 changes to a 20.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: But you have to trust that state intervention will be done with any brains.
Well, my suggested solution is indeed precisely what happened in Norway, so it has been done in the past.
This might work better for Norwegian, since there might just be fewer countries that use that language than countries that use English.
For there to be any consistency, there would need to be an international conference with agreements made and ratified by each English-speaking country.
I'm thinking it might be simpler just to teach the kids the rule for "its" and "it's".
posted
Argh. I don't think it's that hard. I teach 12-year-olds who, trust me, don't care, and they are capable of learning "NO APOSTROPHES IN POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS!!!" Especially when I jump up and down and scream it, then make them repeat it. (I don't worry about indefinite pronouns in making the distinction. They have already securely filed the personal possessive pronouns together mentally, and no kid has ever said, "Hey! Wait! Technically, "somebody" is a pronoun, too!!") They really get it when I point out that they would never under any circumstance write "the boy ripped hi's pants."
Now, it's entirely possible and even likely that they stop using the rule when I'm not around to screech and otherwise remind them...but by this time in the year, most of them have learned and are using the rule. With no confusion.
Posts: 834 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:You can't have "It's" mean both the possessive and "it is."
Why not? We can have "aunt's" mean both the possessive and "aunt is."
we use "its' and "It's" all the time though. Other ambiguities are less important. This one is pretty important.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think we should just get rid of the apostrophes in contractions too, and possessives. Apostrophes are unnecessary, as its always clear from context what is needed. How hard would it be to understand sentences like "I went to my moms but I couldnt breathe there because of her smoking so I decided Id go home"? Apostrophes are superfluous. I say we leave them off from now on.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not that the usage of the word "it"'s confusing in itself, it's just that its usage sometimes makes its users question whether it's better to use its apostrophe or ignore it. Isn't it?
I say let us do away with apostrophes altogether. I mean, they really are not needed. While they may be an easy way of expressing the point one is making, they can be dodged. Sentences do not need them.
Instead of saying, "Orincoro's thread" we can say "The thread of Orincoro".
Instead of saying "It's not its fault" we can say instead "It is not the fault of it".
Wouldn't that be so much simpler? [/sarcasm]
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[No No]](graemlins/nono.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Have a nice day!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
