Abuse of language

[EFLImpudence]

yet they accepted that, in words like "its" (when used in its possessive sense) one should omit the 'possessive apostrophe' that should really be there - so as to avoid the possessive " It's " being confused with "It's " being used as a contraction of "it is".

Oh dear, I can't let that one go.
I would hardly say English worries about causing confusion.

Do you think there should be an apostrophe in 'his'?
Not to mention 'hers', 'ours', 'yours', 'theirs'.

The words as they are spelled are possessive pronouns and indicate possession without the need for the apostrophe and just happen to end with 's' unlike 'my', 'mine', 'your' or 'her' which obviously do not have an apostrophe.

 

[JohnW2]

Do you think there should be an apostrophe in 'his'? .... Not to mention 'hers', 'ours', 'yours', 'theirs'. .... The words as they are spelled are possessive pronouns and indicate possession without the need for the apostrophe and just happen to end with 's' unlike 'my', 'mine', 'your' or 'her' which obviously do not have an apostrophe.

Thanks. Interesting. I may have learned something here (after goodness knows how many decades of not knowing/realising!) ...

The usual convention is that one indicates possession by adding an "s", with a preceding apostrophe, to a word (usually a noun).

When it comes to pronouns, I have always accepted that we do not use I's, you's, he's, we's, you's or them's because there are specific possessive pronouns available (my, your (formally thy), his, our, your & their) which do not simply add an 's' to the corresponding pronoun (hence don't have/need an apostrophe). If these possessives had (which they haven't) been formed just by addition of a terminal 's', then I probably would have expected the apostrophe to be included.

[I'm less sure what part of speech are things like "yours", "ours" and "theirs"]

"Her" and "it" seem rather different, in that the accepted corresponding possessives are formed by simply adding an 's' to the pronoun. For that reason, I think I have probably always believed that both 'ought' to have an apostrophe - although, as I said, I was taught that one should not include an apostrophe in the (possessive) " it's ", since it then would be confused with the 'contracted " it's " meaning "it is". However, there is no such potential confusion with " her's ", so I think I have probably always included an apostrophe when I have written that.

So, maybe you have educated me, after nearly seven decades of speaking this language

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

Cobblers. And I suppose you claim that his should be hi's? There is no difference

See what I've just written in post #77 as regards what may have been a life-long misunderstanding on my part (in relation only to the possessive of "her", given what I was taught about "it").

As I say in that post, the issue only potentially exists in relation to possessives of "her" and "it" (in which cases the possessive is formed by simply adding an 's' to the corresponding pronoun'), albeit my teacher's 'over-ruled' the issue in relation to "it".

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

"Her" and "it" seem rather different, in that the accepted corresponding possessives are formed by simply adding an 's' to the pronoun.

No, 'her' is the possessive pronoun; 'hers' is equivalent to 'yours' - still pronouns indicating possession but used when the noun for the possessed object, is omitted.

I have your cup; where is hers?
I have yours; where is her cup?

I have your cup; where is his?
I have his; where is your cup?

 

[JohnW2]

No, 'her' is the possessive pronoun;

I think you are probably missing my point - which is not about grammatical truths/conventions (with which I am not now disagreeing) but, rather, about my life-long perception of the words "hers" and "its". In a literal sense, they both are the corresponding pronoun "with an 's' added to the end" (which is not the case with any of the other possessive pronouns).

That's why I think I have always felt (seemingly incorrectly) that they both should have apostrophes. As I've said, in the case of "its", I haven't done that, because I was explicitly taught not to, but I think I probably have spend my whole life writing "her's". Mind you, judging my the amout online about " hers vs her's " (virtually of of which seems to agree with you), I am definitely 'not alone'!

'hers' is equivalent to 'yours' - still pronouns indicating possession but used when the noun for the possessed object, is omitted.

Tangential to the current discussion, but ... I obviously understand the use of "your" and "yours" (it just 'comes naturally'), but I'm still not sure what part of speech the latter is - it almost sounds like 'a possessive of a possessive'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

I think you are probably missing my point

Ah - ok.

Tangential to the current discussion, but ... I obviously understand the use of "your" and "yours" (it just 'comes naturally'), but I'm still not sure what part of speech the latter is - it almost sounds like 'a possessive of a possessive'.

Still just a possessive pronoun I think.

 

[JohnW2]

Still just a possessive pronoun I think.

Ah, I think that maybe both of us can learn something here. If one believes the Cambridge Dictionary, which says ...

We use pronouns to refer to possession and ‘belonging’. There are two types: possessive pronouns and possessive determiners. We use possessive determiners before a noun. We use possessive pronouns in place of a noun:

... it would seem that, strictly speaking, whilst, say, "yours" is a possessive pronoun, "your" actually is not - since it is a "possessive determiner" (an animal I had never heard of until a few minutes ago ).

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

Nor I, but -

I would disagree that what it is calling a 'possessive pronoun' is in place of a noun - the 'possessive determiner' would instead be required if you used the noun; if it said "in place of both" that might be a different matter but still dubious.

 

[BS3036]

since it is a "possessive determiner"

I was rather surprised to learn last week that the french call such a word a possessive adjective (I 've always thought of it as a possessive pronoun - but when you think about it that is illogical).

 

[JohnW2]

I was rather surprised to learn last week that the french call such a word a possessive adjective (I 've always thought of it as a possessive pronoun - but when you think about it that is illogical).

I agree - since it is 'describing' a noun (the 'possession of' that noun) then it would seem to logically be called an adjective, not a pronoun.

Edit: As I understand it, a pronoun is really just a type of noun and, as such, has to be capable of being the Subject and/or Object of a verb - which is not the case with the words we have come to describe as "possessive pronouns" - so, as above, seemingly not a logical (arguably not 'correct') name for such words.

Kind Regards, John

 

[sparkwright]

My pet hate is people wrongly using apostrophes for plural.

Usually when the singular word ends with a vowel.
For example
Pizza's instead of pizzas.
Spa's instead of spas.
Mini's instead of minis.
??? Hi-fi's instead of hi-fis ???(spell checker didn't like that one)

They also seem to do it with initials:-
MOT's instead of MOTs.

Also with numbers, such as this decade:-
1980's instead of 1980s.

 

[sparkwright]

Maybe the plural of hi-fi should simply be hi-fi.

Like the plural of sheep is sheep.

 

[JohnW2]

Nor I, but - I would disagree that what it is calling a 'possessive pronoun' is in place of a noun - the 'possessive determiner' would instead be required if you used the noun; if it said "in place of both" that might be a different matter but still dubious.

You are obviously free to disagree with the Cambridge Dictionary if you so wish. Do you disagree with any of these examples they give? ...

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

My pet hate is people wrongly using apostrophes for plural.

Same here, but there are times when it is difficult to find any sensible alternatives - e.g. in the thread which (after being locked) caused this one to arise, I found myself having to write:

...I don't regard it as all that different from "dropping H's " [I know that apostrophe is grammatically incorrect, but I can't think of a better way of writing it! ] ...

Can you think of a better way of writing it? (as I say in the quote "dropping Hs" just wouldn't seem right/adequate).

Kind Regards, John

 

[sparkwright]

Same here, but there are times when it is difficult to find any sensible alternatives - e.g. in the thread which (after being locked) caused this one to arise, I found myself having to write:
Can you think of a better way of writing it? (as I say in the quote "dropping Hs" just wouldn't seem right/adequate).

Kind Regards, John

I think Hs is correct, I don't think an apostrophe should ever be used for plural, as far as I know.