help needed to understand a previous thread

[dorayme]

Toby Inkster wrote:

I think some people include
* -'s for abbreviation of "is"
* -s for possessive of pronoun "it"

Well, apostrophe as contractions generally, especially of "is"
and "are", but often also of "not" in "-n't"

(which they shouldn't, but remembering the difference between verbs,
nouns and pronouns is too complicated for some ;-) )

It's quite normal practice, perhaps a little informal, but that's
ok, one mustn't be too stuffy...

 

[Els]

Well, apostrophe as contractions generally, especially of "is"
and "are", but often also of "not" in "-n't"

Yup. The one on the possessive of nouns is one too I think, but I'm
not sure of what word exactly as my English doesn't date further back
than about 30 years. It's the 's' of the 'second fall' (not sure if
it's called that in English).

It's quite normal practice,

What is, not knowing the difference between a verb, noun or pronoun?

perhaps a little informal, but that's
ok, one mustn't be too stuffy...

I ain't stuffy... ;-)

 

[Martin Clark]

dorayme wrote...

Well, apostrophe as contractions generally, especially of "is"
and "are", but often also of "not" in "-n't"

In contractions, the apostrophe is used in place of the missing letters:
That's - ' replaces i of is.
You're - ' replaces a of are.
Don't - ' replaces o of not.
I've - ' replaces ha of have.

 

[Dylan Parry]

Pondering the eternal question of "Hobnobs or Rich Tea?", Toby Inkster
finally proclaimed:

* -s for plural
* -' for posessives of nouns that already end in "s"
* -'s for posessives of other nouns

tonnes of rules, yes.

You forgot the caveat "possessive 'its' has no apostrophe", and of
course plurals that use -es instead of just -s

 

[Alan J. Flavell]

Pondering the eternal question of "Hobnobs or Rich Tea?", Toby Inkster
finally proclaimed:


You forgot the caveat "possessive 'its' has no apostrophe"

Not only "its". As a general rule, possessive pronouns have no
apostrophe (my, thy, his, her, its, our, your, their). The exception
is "one's".

Of course, this assumes that the student actually knows what a pronoun
is. Perhaps that's not such a good assumption, these days.

 

[Dylan Parry]

Pondering the eternal question of "Hobnobs or Rich Tea?", Alan J.
Flavell finally proclaimed:

Of course, this assumes that the student actually knows what a pronoun
is. Perhaps that's not such a good assumption, these days.

Let's not start that argument again or Dylan will get annoyed and not
speak to Els for a week

 

[Neredbojias]

Yup. The one on the possessive of nouns is one too I think, but I'm
not sure of what word exactly as my English doesn't date further back
than about 30 years. It's the 's' of the 'second fall' (not sure if
it's called that in English).

Probably not. That term is favored by those who remarry.

 

[Neredbojias]

To further the education of mankind, Jim Moe

And just for fun, there is no "viri," only viruses.

Cripes! The eggheads have taken all the fun out of the English language.
I may have to start speaking British for comic relief, old boy.

 

[PeterMcC]

Dylan Parry wrote in

Pondering the eternal question of "Hobnobs or Rich Tea?", Toby Inkster
finally proclaimed:


You forgot the caveat "possessive 'its' has no apostrophe", and of
course plurals that use -es instead of just -s

alt.possessive.its.has.no.apostrophe

 

[Els]

Pondering the eternal question of "Hobnobs or Rich Tea?", Alan J.
Flavell finally proclaimed:


Let's not start that argument again or Dylan will get annoyed and not
speak to Els for a week

<bg>

 

[Toby Inkster]

Toby Inkster finally proclaimed:


You forgot the caveat "possessive 'its' has no apostrophe",

Note my use of "of nouns". "It", like "he" and "she", is a *pronoun*, so
doesn't follow the rules for nouns.

 

[Toby Inkster]

In contractions, the apostrophe is used in place of the missing letters

This is only a fairly loose rule. Many contractions are simply spelt
particular ways by tradition. e.g.

ca(n) n(o)t should be "ca'n't", but is "can't"
w(ill) n(o)t; w'n't; won't
sha(ll) n(o)t; sha'n't; shan't

 

[dorayme]

It's quite normal practice,

What is, not knowing the difference between a verb, noun or pronoun?[/QUOTE]

Ouch! What were _you_ saying was normal practice?

I ain't stuffy... ;-)

And nor did I think this, Els, far from it!

There is a nice book called Eats, Shoots, and Leaves on
apostrophes and commas. Got some good press over here in Oz when
it was published:

http://eatsshootsandleaves.com/ESLquiz.html

(The quiz is slightly flawed, there is an interpretation of one
of the sentences that was missed... but never mind)

 

[dorayme]

dorayme wrote...
In contractions, the apostrophe is used in place of the missing letters:
That's - ' replaces i of is.
You're - ' replaces a of are.
Don't - ' replaces o of not.
I've - ' replaces ha of have.

Indeed, that is what "contraction" means here...

 

[Els]

What is, not knowing the difference between a verb, noun or pronoun?

Ouch! What were _you_ saying was normal practice?[/QUOTE]

I didn't mention any normal practice

And nor did I think this, Els, far from it!

There is a nice book called Eats, Shoots, and Leaves on
apostrophes and commas. Got some good press over here in Oz when
it was published:

http://eatsshootsandleaves.com/ESLquiz.html

(The quiz is slightly flawed, there is an interpretation of one
of the sentences that was missed... but never mind)

Of course(,) there's always a flaw. ;-)

Learned something new though, namely that the rules for commas are the
same as in Dutch, while I previously figured they were different.

 

[Martin Clark]

dorayme wrote...

Indeed, that is what "contraction" means here...

But of course! I was expanding on your comment rather than contradicting
it! However, I should have added something like "in general" as
exceptions will always be found.

Perhaps it would be nice if there was a validator where we could check
the accuracy of what we write. On the other hand, thinking of how M$Word
tries to do just that, perhaps it wouldn't be nice....

 

[dorayme]

Ouch! What were _you_ saying was normal practice?

I didn't mention any normal practice [/QUOTE]

I was conflating - confusedly - what I thought you meant with
what I described as normal practice.

But, your surprise suggests to me I have misread you.

Your actual words:

"I think some people include
* -'s for abbreviation of "is"
* -s for possessive of pronoun "it"

(which they shouldn't, but remembering the difference between
verbs, nouns and pronouns is too complicated for some ;-) )"

This sounded to me like you were saying that people should really
not use the apostrophe for contraction of "is", that it is a bad
rule. What is the object of your "which" in "which they
shouldn't"? I had thought this must be either or both the rules
you mention. Hence my original defense of the practice as being
quite normal.

Does this get me out of trouble, Els?

 

[dorayme]

dorayme wrote...
But of course! I was expanding on your comment rather than contradicting
it!

And a good expansion too, Martin... i realise now that what I had
in mind was more complete than what I wrote. You filled in gaps.
I might have to employ you as I get increasingly demented...

 

[Els]

I didn't mention any normal practice

I was conflating - confusedly - what I thought you meant with
what I described as normal practice.

But, your surprise suggests to me I have misread you.

Your actual words:

"I think some people include
* -'s for abbreviation of "is"
* -s for possessive of pronoun "it"

(which they shouldn't, but remembering the difference between
verbs, nouns and pronouns is too complicated for some ;-) )"

This sounded to me like you were saying that people should really
not use the apostrophe for contraction of "is", that it is a bad
rule. What is the object of your "which" in "which they
shouldn't"? I had thought this must be either or both the rules
you mention. Hence my original defense of the practice as being
quite normal.

Does this get me out of trouble, Els? [/QUOTE]

Sure does
The object of my "which" was that they shouldn't include those two
rules in "the list of rules about when to use just -s or -'s on nouns"


I'd never say you can't use "'s" instead of "is", and if using just an
"s" for possessive "it" would be wrong, these last couple of posts
would never have happened ;-)