OT: Quick Break. Its', It's or Its?

[Kibitzer]

I know how to use a preposition to write "the fabulous guard development program of UTENN, Knoxville". ("at" is also used.)
Is there a way to write this using an " 's "?
Is "UTENN, Knoxville's fabulous guard development program" grammatically correct?
Or " "UTENN, KNoxville"'s fabulous guard development program "

Stick with #1. It works.

 

[JordyG]

ITS. These three letters seem to cause lots of both misuse and consternation. Let me help our uncertain writers. Here goes:

First, its'. This is a wretched and useless construct. Abolish it! Permanently!

Next, its. A useful possessive, like hers and theirs.

Finally, it's. A contraction of it is. There is no other meaning!​

Many writers mistakenly cling to use of it's as a possessive, apparently believing that inserted apostrophe is necessary to indicate possession. Wrong! There is only one usage for it's and that is to say it is, briefly. Consider this:

"Gampel Pavilion is aging and it's sad to see its roof leaking."
​

SUMMARY.

Never write its'.
Write it's only to shorten it is.
Use its to indicate possession.
​

Good luck. Or fire away.

Truly, so many its'. I don't remember an occasion where I've seen its'. Maybe I should get out more.

 

[Bliss]

I defer to English teacher Sargassoc since your question was posed to her.

I defer to English teacher Sargassoc since your question was posed to her.

What's your take on my question? Thanks.

 

[Kibitzer]

What's your take on my question? Thanks.

You asked a good (tough) question, and now you won't let me dodge it.

I am about to leave for an important event. I'll accept the challenge to answer later today. Promise.

OK?

 

[Sargassoc]

Okay, I have a question regarding correct use of "each other" and "one another". I recall being taught in grade school that "each" referred to two, as in two people, and "one" referred to more than two. Examples: "Tom and Jim spoke to each other. They were joined by Bob and the three talked with one another".

I'm beginning to think that my teachers were incorrect or that my memory is faulty because I hear TV folks using these constantly opposite of each other, as, "Geno and CD talked with one another". What say you, English teacher? (Seriously, I'd like a clarification.)

Not necessarily. They're mostly interchangeable, though, personally, I confess to never using "one another." Not sure why, except "each other" works the same way and seems cleaner.

Here are two useful links, the first of which is much more succinct than the second. The second source, however, does make the distinction that your teachers made, though I suggest that distinction is all but gone today.

1. CAMBRIDGE DICTIONARY
2. GRAMMAR GIRL

 

[Papa33]

I agree and even though I'm armed with The Chicago Manual of Style and The AP Guide to Grammar and Usage, it could take an entire off-season to thrash out that issue here.

Almost as difficult to explain as placement of quotation marks outside of commas and periods.

Teaching English, I always favored the MLA style manual's recommendation, but acknowledged there were other authorities to consult. Unfortunately, in the case of managing plural/singular possession, that meant entertaining too many "correct" choices. For beginning and young writers, I recommended simplicity. For possession, I recommended one simple rule: always use an 's' and and an apostrophe to make a noun possessive. How? First, always just write the singular or plural noun. If it does not end in an 's', add apostrophe + s. If it does end in 's', just add the apostrophe afterwards. Key is to simply write the noun. It works; there's always an 's' and an apostrophe.

Men= men's problems. Baby= baby's problem. Babies= babies' problems.

The placement of internal or end punctuation relative to quotation marks was one of the very rare cases when I admitted that there was no logical way to figure it out: commas and period go inside; everything else goes outside . . . except for question marks, where "it depends."

 

[temery]

But what if something belongs to Cousin It?

ITS. These three letters seem to cause lots of both misuse and consternation. Let me help our uncertain writers. Here goes:

First, its'. This is a wretched and useless construct. Abolish it! Permanently!

Next, its. A useful possessive, like hers and theirs.

Finally, it's. A contraction of it is. There is no other meaning!​

Many writers mistakenly cling to use of it's as a possessive, apparently believing that inserted apostrophe is necessary to indicate possession. Wrong! There is only one usage for it's and that is to say it is, briefly. Consider this:

"Gampel Pavilion is aging and it's sad to see its roof leaking."
​

SUMMARY.

Never write its'.
Write it's only to shorten it is.
Use its to indicate possession.
​

Good luck. Or fire away.

 

[wvhuskyfan]

Teaching English, I always favored the MLA style manual's recommendation, but acknowledged there were other authorities to consult. Unfortunately, in the case of managing plural/singular possession, that meant entertaining too many "correct" choices. For beginning and young writers, I recommended simplicity. For possession, I recommended one simple rule: always use an 's' and and an apostrophe to make a noun possessive. How? First, always just write the singular or plural noun. If it does not end in an 's', add apostrophe + s. If it does end in 's', just add the apostrophe afterwards. Key is to simply write the noun. It works; there's always an 's' and an apostrophe.

Men= men's problems. Baby= baby's problem. Babies= babies' problems.

The placement of internal or end punctuation relative to quotation marks was one of the very rare cases when I admitted that there was no logical way to figure it out: commas and period go inside; everything else goes outside . . . except for question marks, where "it depends."

yes, but isn't there an exception if it is a person's name that ends in "s", then you add the apostrophe and s, as in "Santa Claus's elves"? agt least that's what I remember being taught, but I see the final s being dropped a lot in that situation.

 

[Papa33]

yes, but isn't there an exception if it is a person's name that ends in "s", then you add the apostrophe and s, as in "Santa Claus's elves"? agt least that's what I remember being taught, but I see the final s being dropped a lot in that situation.

I've seen style manuals that make the "s's" an option, so it wouldn't be wrong (if you subscribe to those particular manuals) but I preferred to offer my students an equally correct and much easier rule to apply. Then we could move on to more important and subtle matters of written expression-- like clarity and logic and persuasion. Those are principles that the best writers and makers of arguments in this forum raise to an art form.

 

[Kibitzer]

yes, but isn't there an exception if it is a person's name that ends in "s", then you add the apostrophe and s, as in "Santa Claus's elves"? agt least that's what I remember being taught, but I see the final s being dropped a lot in that situation.

AP and Chicago will assure you that"Santa Claus's elves" is correct. But Chicago cites exceptions to its apostrophe+s rule that include "in Jesus' name" and "Achilles' heel."

Mary Norris is the highly esteemed copy editor for The New Yorker magazine. Her recent (and highly acclaimed) book, "Between You and Me," is casually referred to by counterparts, critics and colleagues alike as "Norris's book." In a recent autobio sketch, Mary confessed to once wanting to marry her "boss's daughter."

 

[Bliss]

You asked a good (tough) question, and now you won't let me dodge it.

I am about to leave for an important event. I'll accept the challenge to answer later today. Promise.

OK?

Okay, thanks.

 

[Bliss]

Not necessarily. They're mostly interchangeable, though, personally, I confess to never using "one another." Not sure why, except "each other" works the same way and seems cleaner.

Here are two useful links, the first of which is much more succinct than the second. The second source, however, does make the distinction that your teachers made, though I suggest that distinction is all but gone today.

1. CAMBRIDGE DICTIONARY
2. GRAMMAR GIRL

Thank you. I didn't think I was losin' it quite yet.

“Each Other” Is a Reciprocal Pronoun
The phrase “each other” is known as a reciprocal pronoun because it shows a bidirectional action. For example, if Bill and Ted are being excellent to each other, that means Bill is being excellent to Ted, and Ted is being excellent to Bill. They’re practicing what you might call excellence reciprocity.

“One Another” Is a Reciprocal Pronoun
But Bill and Ted aren’t talking about being excellent just to Bill and Ted; they want each person in the world to be excellent to every other person. According to some grammarians, if we’re talking about more than just two people, we should use a different reciprocal pronoun: one another. In other words, Bill and Ted should more properly have said, “Be excellent to one another.”

 

[Kibitzer]

Okay, thanks.

Yesterday's activities just overwhelmed me. Sorry. I remain determined to provide you my most thoughtful response.

 

[Bliss]

Teaching English, I
"

Please tell me if there's a rule for deciding whether a word should end in "or" versus "er" or if it's just a matter of memory. Examples include "auditor" and "character." Thanks.

 

[meyers7]

Thank you. I didn't think I was losin' it quite yet.

“Each Other” Is a Reciprocal Pronoun
The phrase “each other” is known as a reciprocal pronoun because it shows a bidirectional action. For example, if Bill and Ted are being excellent to each other, that means Bill is being excellent to Ted, and Ted is being excellent to Bill. They’re practicing what you might call excellence reciprocity.

“One Another” Is a Reciprocal Pronoun
But Bill and Ted aren’t talking about being excellent just to Bill and Ted; they want each person in the world to be excellent to every other person. According to some grammarians, if we’re talking about more than just two people, we should use a different reciprocal pronoun: one another. In other words, Bill and Ted should more properly have said, “Be excellent to one another.”

I don't think Bill and Ted were any where near English majors. They had enough trouble with History.

And party on, dudes.

 

[Papa33]

Please tell me if there's a rule for deciding whether a word should end in "or" versus "er" or if it's just a matter of memory. Examples include "auditor" and "character." Thanks.

ADAIK, there is no absolutely dependable rule; however, the suffix -or most often denote a person/thing who/that does what the root word (almost always a verb) suggests:
an actor acts; a projector projects, etc.

But then, there are, of course, the exceptions:
a writer writes, but an author does not authe. ("author" derives from a Latin word meaning to increase, originate, and we recognize that such creative individuals are creators or originators)

The -er suffix most often names a person or thing associated with a particular quality or place or thing.
***********
But I'd really prefer to talk Husky basketball, which has been at an astonishingly high level this season. Everyone seemed to agree that this season would test Geno's mettle as a coach. I'd say he and his staff have passed any reasonable test of his ability to mold and remake a group of talented but relatively untested players into a potent team. Kudos also to the players who have responded to the challenges by refusing to be overwhelmed or intimidated.

 

[Bliss]

ADAIK, there is no absolutely dependable rule; however, the suffix -or most often denote a person/thing who/that does what the root word (almost always a verb) suggests:
an actor acts; a projector projects, etc.

But then, there are, of course, the exceptions:
a writer writes, but an author does not authe. ("author" derives from a Latin word meaning to increase, originate, and we recognize that such creative individuals are creators or originators)

The -er suffix most often names a person or thing associated with a particular quality or place or thing.
***********
But I'd really prefer to talk Husky basketball, which has been at an astonishingly high level this season. Everyone seemed to agree that this season would test Geno's mettle as a coach. I'd say he and his staff have passed any reasonable test of his ability to mold and remake a group of talented but relatively untested players into a potent team. Kudos also to the players who have responded to the challenges by refusing to be overwhelmed or intimidated.

Thanks.

 

[Kibitzer]

Yesterday's activities just overwhelmed me. Sorry. I remain determined to provide you my most thoughtful response.

My thoughtful response is to thank you and offer praise for your comprehensive and enlightening post#37 that explained reciprocal pronouns so well. (Seemed to echo "Grammar Girl").

Frankly, I got caught up with the query posed by trb123 about UTENN, Knoxville, commas, and quotation marks and my focus went kaflooey.

Game time Wednesday, 7:00 p.m. GO HUSKIES!