or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Is my English getting better?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is my English getting better? - Page 3

post #31 of 40
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by bachbeet,May 16 2005,21:46
And another confusing anomaly was exposed in this thread.  That of the possessive form of "it."  Why does it have to be different for that one word than it is for most other words?  For example: One can say "Henry's over there."  We know it means "Henry is over there."  Or, one can say "Is this Henry's?"  We know it asks whether something belongs to Henry.  We know these meanings from the context.  Why does it have to be different with "it?"  No sense.
Well, I found it logical once it got pointed out to me. There are two contenders for the form it's: the 'it is' and the possessive it. One had to give way to avoid ambiguity and it was the possessive it that lost the apostrophe. I agree though, why make a special rule for this? Have any of you got any more sins that us foreigners regularly commit against English? I could suggest inapropriate ordering of words, but it's a bit hard to fix. B
its is a possessive in the way that his and hers are, and those don't take apostrophes.  It is not a genitive in the way that "Bob's" would be in the sentence "The pen is Bob's."  The "it's" with an apostrophe is a contraction of it is -- in the  same way that "he's" is a contraction of "he is".  I don't see how this is inconsistent with other grammatical rules.  It's pretty simple.  Maybe it's a corollary to the illiterate trend of putting an apostrophe after any plural, particularly plural proper nouns, such as "Those are my Green's [sic]."  Correct spelling:  Greens.  It's a huge pet peeve of mine.
post #32 of 40
Yeah, "like" he said... If we're talking pet peeves, my current one is the overuse of the progressive when it isn't needed, such as, quoting my secretary: "Are you wanting to talk to Fabienne?" Grrrrrr... About prepositions at the end of a sentence, let's not get too pedantic. And phrasal verbs are exempt.
post #33 of 40
Quote:
"Are you wanting to talk to Fabienne?"
She forgot "today": "Are you wanting to talk to Fabienne, today?"
post #34 of 40
she will have been wanting to talk to fabienne. bleh... i think that's called the future perfect tense? i can't remember all that grammar from, uh, grammar school. she be wantin' to talk to her...all up in there...fo' shizzle. (sorry, i'm only on my second glass...i'll try to catch up.)
post #35 of 40
Quote:
Quote:
(BjornH @ May 16 2005,13:03)
Quote:
Originally Posted by bachbeet,May 16 2005,21:46
And another confusing anomaly was exposed in this thread.  That of the possessive form of "it."  Why does it have to be different for that one word than it is for most other words?  For example: One can say "Henry's over there."  We know it means "Henry is over there."  Or, one can say "Is this Henry's?"  We know it asks whether something belongs to Henry.  We know these meanings from the context.  Why does it have to be different with "it?"  No sense.
Well, I found it logical once it got pointed out to me. There are two contenders for the form it's: the 'it is' and the possessive it. One had to give way to avoid ambiguity and it was the possessive it that lost the apostrophe. I agree though, why make a special rule for this? Have any of you got any more sins that us foreigners regularly commit against English? I could suggest inapropriate ordering of words, but it's a bit hard to fix. B
its is a possessive in the way that his and hers are, and those don't take apostrophes.  It is not a genitive in the way that "Bob's" would be in the sentence "The pen is Bob's."  The "it's" with an apostrophe is a contraction of it is -- in the  same way that "he's" is a contraction of "he is".  I don't see how this is inconsistent with other grammatical rules.  It's pretty simple.  Maybe it's a corollary to the illiterate trend of putting an apostrophe after any plural, particularly plural proper nouns, such as "Those are my Green's [sic]."  Correct spelling:  Greens.  It's a huge pet peeve of mine.
you know, the incorrectly applied apostrophe used to be a pet peeve of mine as well, but now i sortof perversely see the appeal of it. sometimes i don't like sullying a pristine proper noun with the addition of an 's', or, heaven forbid, 'ies' or some other pluralization. it just feels kinda wrong, like i'm having my way with someone else's name. Coincidentally, there were 3 Henrys at the conference. Coincidentally, there were 3 Henries at the conference. Coincidentally, there were 3 Henry's at the conference. Coincidentally, there were 3 "Henry"s at the conference. Coincidentally, there were 3 people named Henry at the conference. ok maybe it was a bad example. and then there's the problem of (for e.g.) team names, like the Braves. (never mind the A's.) The Braves are not going to win the Series. The Atlanta Braves is a great team. ...are a great team? Who is the Braves's pitcher? ...the Braves' pitcher? Who's on First?
post #36 of 40
post #37 of 40
[quote]
Quote:
(ernest @ May 16 2005,05:58)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Wang,May 16 2005,20:42
What are you talking about?
"About what are you talking?" Prepositions (e.g. to, about, with, from, for, etc) should not be at the end of a sentence. Well, not in more formal speech anyway. It can also get a little awkward in slang. E.g. 'I am not the person with whom to mess.'
Use of technically correct grammar in that last example would suggest that you would be the type of person with whom one would in fact like to mess.
post #38 of 40
[quote]
Quote:
(Kent Wang @ May 16 2005,12:42)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ernest,May 16 2005,05:58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Wang,May 16 2005,20:42
What are you talking about?
"About what are you talking?" Prepositions (e.g. to, about, with, from, for, etc) should not be at the end of a sentence. Well, not in more formal speech anyway. It can also get a little awkward in slang. E.g. 'I am not the person with whom to mess.'
Use of technically correct grammar in that last example would suggest that you would be the type of person with whom one would in fact like to mess.
I gots yet ta hear anyone speaking slang who indeed uses da werd whom. Jus' like Orenthawl James. Translation: I have yet to hear anyone speaking slang who indeed uses the word whom. It would however sound quite funny. Jon.
post #39 of 40
[quote]
Quote:
(LA Guy @ May 17 2005,15:00)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Wang,May 16 2005,12:42
Quote:
Originally Posted by ernest,May 16 2005,05:58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Wang,May 16 2005,20:42
What are you talking about?
"About what are you talking?" Prepositions (e.g. to, about, with, from, for, etc) should not be at the end of a sentence. Well, not in more formal speech anyway. It can also get a little awkward in slang. E.g. 'I am not the person with whom to mess.'
Use of technically correct grammar in that last example would suggest that you would be the type of person with whom one would in fact like to mess.
I gots yet ta hear anyone speaking slang who indeed uses da werd whom. Jus' like Orenthawl James. Translation: I have yet to hear anyone speaking slang who indeed uses the word whom. It would however sound quite funny. Jon.
Yo, dAt b dA pLayA to wHoM I wUz taLkiN bOut dA wHiP wHen dA huNNy goT aLL uP iN mY gRiLLe what's wrong with that?
post #40 of 40
[quote]
Quote:
(imageWIS @ May 17 2005,13:26)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LA Guy,May 17 2005,15:00
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Wang,May 16 2005,12:42
Quote:
Originally Posted by ernest,May 16 2005,05:58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Wang,May 16 2005,20:42
What are you talking about?
"About what are you talking?" Prepositions (e.g. to, about, with, from, for, etc) should not be at the end of a sentence. Well, not in more formal speech anyway. It can also get a little awkward in slang. E.g. 'I am not the person with whom to mess.'
Use of technically correct grammar in that last example would suggest that you would be the type of person with whom one would in fact like to mess.
I gots yet ta hear anyone speaking slang who indeed uses da werd whom. Jus' like Orenthawl James. Translation: I have yet to hear anyone speaking slang who indeed uses the word whom. It would however sound quite funny. Jon.
Yo, dAt b dA pLayA to wHoM I wUz taLkiN bOut dA wHiP wHen dA huNNy goT aLL uP iN mY gRiLLe what's wrong with that?
Hahahahaha Jon.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Chat
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Is my English getting better?