Clock Crew

Why do we not put an apostrophie on "its" in its possessive sense when we do it for Freddy's, firemen's and foreigner's in their possessive sense AND contraction sense?

THIS MAKES NO SENSE

I was expecting this to be a Monty Python's reference.

The actual outcome was very disappointing.

Quote from: RibsClock;1818240English doesn't make sense.
[/thread]

there are infinite examples of this

William Ollier once wrote that, given English's irregularities, we may be just as right in spelling fish as 'ghoti' than we would be just spelling it 'fish'. I'd assume "its" and "it's" inherit the same fundamental flaws here, though they certainly help us keep track of the subject.

"It's bedtime [...]" vs "Its bedtime [...]"

It's easier for us to distinguish "the bedtime belonging to it" from "the time that is for bed" thanks to the apostrophe. Essentially, yes, both should take the apostrophe, but it was necessary to sacrifice one in order that we discern it from the other. In some parallel universe, a coin toss made "it's" the possessive and "its" the contraction.

"its" is a possessive pronoun like "his" and "hers" you stupid sons a bitches

(https://clockcrew.net/talk/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffiles.fraterslibertas.com%2FImages%2FSeparated%2Fpythonits.jpg&hash=bcb7ad0cd823b9c7b2c5f058d12be832061fa354)

Quote from: Slurpee;1818250"its" is a possessive pronoun like "his" and "hers" you stupid sons a bitches

Also this

Quote from: Slurpee;1818250"its" is a possessive pronoun like "his" and "hers" you stupid sons a bitches

"his cat, hers cat"

Quote from: clockradioclock;1818258"his cat, hers cat"

her cat

but its cat?

yes. its cat.
just like you wouldn't say he's or she's cat; you'd use the possessive pronoun.

the door fell off its hinges, the truck was inside of its garage, and the gorilla pet its cat.

It is cat?

(https://clockcrew.net/talk/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdummiesoftheyear.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F07%2Fcute-kittenweee.jpg&hash=9809320b8f9cdc4e4721072faf6eab52646c2c6a)

yes it's cat!

Quote from: AnkhClock;1818242I was expecting this to be a Monty Python's reference.

The actual outcome was very disappointing.

ni!

ITT: a lot of people that don't understand grammar

Quote from: clammo;1818267as opposed to it's cat? it is cat?????

as opposed to the cat belonging to it

:wiebel:

"It" is a pronoun.
   Who's cat is it? Its he's/she's/my's/you's/it's/us's/them's cat.[/s]x
No, no es correcto.
   Whose cat is it? It's his/her/my/your/its/our/their cat.√
Si, correcto.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saxon_genitive
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pronoun
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possessive_pronoun

I don't know how this could possibly be any more clear

hey dummy i'm not arguing what the english language dictates i'm just pointing out that it's unbalanced/doesn't add up

as everyone has already done in this thread

it adds up just fine if you're not an idiot

of all the wrinkles in the english language, you picked the one that makes the most practical sense of them all good job

Quote from: biggs;1818316it adds up just fine if you're not an idiot

of all the wrinkles in the english language, you picked the one that makes the most practical sense of them all good job

you must be dyslexic if this adds up to you

Quote from: Slurpee;1818263just like you wouldn't say he's or she's cat; you'd use the possessive pronoun.

Jim (he), Jim's (he's) ---> (his)
Sally (she), Sally's (she's) ---> (her)

now if the english language was all fine and dandy and actually coherent with itself, apostrophes would be used in the possessive sense ALL the time, and not just when whoever-the-fuck said so.

perhaps somebody could shed some light on why possessive pronouns are so important because i'm no language buff and frankly i see them as fucking useless. that being said i'm not going to go around saying he's or she's

Quote from: RibsClock;1818240English doesn't make sense.
[/thread]

i'm saying just the apostrophe on "it's" and the lack of it on "its", i don't care about other possessives because some can be stupid yeah sure

if you think "it's" is stupid then you must think all other contractions are stupid too because there's a very clear reason to leave the apostrophe off on the possessive

Quote from: MiraclefruitClock;1818318if the english language was all fine and dandy and actually coherent with itself, apostrophes would be used in the possessive sense ALL the time, and not just when whoever-the-fuck said so.

The possessive "'s" is actually the anomaly. Apostrophes in English are usually used to denote that something is missing in a contraction. I will probably come back to this in a second.

Quote from: MiraclefruitClock;1818318perhaps somebody could shed some light on why possessive pronouns are so important because i'm no language buff and frankly i see them as fucking useless. that being said i'm not going to go around saying he's or she's

Possessive pronouns (and their cousins, vanilla pronouns) substitute for other parts of the sentence so you don't keep repeating yourself and make horrible stilted sentences.

That's to say, one probably doesn't want to say:
"Jim was dicking around with Jim's sock before Jim put Jim's sock in Jim's sock's drawer."
when one can instead say:
"Jim was dicking around with his sock before he put it in its drawer."
(One could say "a sock" or "the drawer", but that fails to convey whose sock or what drawer. Jim's sock and what he was doing with it, and with which drawer, probably don't sound very important, but you can probably extrapolate the potential importance of clarity that is served.)

AS TO AN EXPLANATION FOR the lack of the apostrophe in the possessive pronoun "its", it's to distinguish it from its counterpart, the contraction "it's".
E.g., what I'm conveying in this sentence:
"I can see it's fat."
y esto:
"I can see its fat."
are two completely different things.

If the possessive distinction didn't exist in nouns and pronouns, it would have to exist in adjectives, probably as a declension, and irregular adjectives would become a fucking nightmare.

Obviously, the purpose of language is communication, and pedantry isn't always called for as long as the idea being conveyed is completely clear, but failing to observe the distinction can also make sentences more difficult to parse in a single read, which can be jarring for the reader, and counterproductive to conveying an idea.

Now ask me about "whom." =]

Quote from: biggs;1818321i'm saying just the apostrophe on "it's" and the lack of it on "its", i don't care about other possessives because some can be stupid yeah sure

if you think "it's" is stupid then you must think all other contractions are stupid too because there's a very clear reason to leave the apostrophe off on the possessive

it's (it is) is fine and i'm guessing the reason for leaving the apostrophe off the possessive would be, as slurpee said, to avoid confusion between the two

Quote from: Slurpee;1818323Possessive pronouns (and their cousins, vanilla pronouns) substitute for other parts of the sentence so you don't keep repeating yourself and make horrible stilted sentences.

That's to say, one probably doesn't want to say:
"Jim was dicking around with Jim's sock before Jim put Jim's sock in Jim's sock's drawer."
when one can instead say:
"Jim was dicking around with his sock before he put it in its drawer."
(One could say "a sock" or "the drawer", but that fails to convey whose sock or what drawer. Jim's sock and what he was doing with it, and with which drawer, probably don't sound very important, but you can probably extrapolate the potential importance of clarity that is served.)

"Jim was dicking around with he's sock before he put he's sock in it's drawer."

and really this sounds horrible and stilted and possibly foreign but that's only because we're all used to how strange the english language is already

QuoteIf the possessive distinction didn't exist in nouns and pronouns, it would have to exist in adjectives, probably as a declension, and irregular adjectives would become a fucking nightmare.

well i may be alone on this but i'd prefer the entire english language changed to fit my need to say she's, he's and it's >: (

QuoteObviously, the purpose of language is communication, and pedantry isn't always called for as long as the idea being conveyed is completely clear, but failing to observe the distinction can also make sentences more difficult to parse in a single read, which can be jarring for the reader, and counterproductive to conveying an idea.

Kind of like these:

"Do you know what a buck does to does?"
"I like to read. In fact, I read a book yesterday."
"Don't desert me here in the desert!"
"With every number I saw, my mind got number and number."

Quote from: Slurpee;1818324Now ask me about "whom." =]

isn't that because you can't end a sentence with 'who'

Quote from: MiraclefruitClock;1818327"Jim was dicking around with he's sock before he put he's sock in it's drawer."
 
 and really this sounds horrible and stilted and possibly foreign but that's only because we're all used to how strange the english language is already
 
 well i may be alone on this but i'd prefer the entire english language changed to fit my need to say she's, he's and it's >: (

I don't know for sure but it's possible the current set of possessive pronouns started out as "he's", "it's", etc. and evolved and contracted to their current state over time. Don't know don't know don't know. Linguistic history (and its friend, the history of linguistics) is not my bag.
Languages change a lot. Any English older than like 8-10 centuries back is basically unreadable alien gibberish. That is all I know.

I bring this up because it is partially relevant to my next point.
 

Quote from: MiraclefruitClock;1818327Kind of like these:

"Do you know what a buck does to does?"
"I like to read. In fact, I read a book yesterday."
"Don't desert me here in the desert!"
"With every number I saw, my mind got number and number."

Yes hahahaha exactly.

The thing is English is a bastard language, with germanic and latinate influences on the structure, lexicon, pronunciation and... alllll that good stuff. That probably doesn't mean much to you if you don't know a lot about linguistics (and I wouldn't blame you) but the long and short of it is sometimes parts of it won't mesh well with other parts. You guys were not wrong to acknowledge that English is dumb and doesn't make any sense.

Possessive pronouns, though, make sense in and of themselves and are seldom confused with the rest of the language, so it's kind of a silly thing to complain about.

Quote from: MiraclefruitClock;1818329isn't that because you can't end a sentence with 'who'

Kind of, sort of, not really.
I was kidding in bringing it up, but it's to do with the linguistic properties of a sentence. "Who" refers to a sentence's subject, and "whom" refers to an object.

It's a wildly unimportant distinction.

Quote from: AnkhClock;1818252

this is the only reason i came here for