ATTN: Copyeditors and Grammar Fiends

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
While I do consider myself a Grammar Fiend, I am a little bit confused over the usage of "its" and "it's".

Obviously one uses "it's" where "it is" could be used, but when implying posession (eg. "The dog licked it's/its wounds.") which one are we supposed to use? I've been told that "it's" should be used in the above example, but if that is so, when should one use "its"? Could someone outline some example cases in which each instance is supposed to be used?

Other questions of grammar are welcome in this thread.

Andrew (enneff), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:07 (twenty years ago) link

its

mark p (Mark P), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:09 (twenty years ago) link

Posession = its. No apostrophe.

It Is contraction = ONLY acceptible use of it's.

(pls ignore my spelling errors, because I know I am right on the its/it's issue)

kate (kate), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:10 (twenty years ago) link

you were told wrong. The dog licked its wounds.

http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000227.htm

teeny (teeny), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:10 (twenty years ago) link

it's = it is ONLY

possessive of it has no apostrophe EVAH!!

viz: the dog licked its wounds

ditto plural of it ("he ended his avant-garde poem with a whole line of its"

mark s (mark s), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:11 (twenty years ago) link

its

otherwise it would read "the dog licked it is wounds" or "the dog licked it has wounds"

j0e (j0e), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:11 (twenty years ago) link

close brackets

mark s (mark s), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:11 (twenty years ago) link

Its = ownership thing, think of it as like his or hers.

Tim (Tim), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:12 (twenty years ago) link

and his and hers never take an apostrophe, if that helps you remember.

teeny (teeny), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:13 (twenty years ago) link

grammarian cluster alert!!

mark s (mark s), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:13 (twenty years ago) link

What if your name is "it"?

Sam (chirombo), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:14 (twenty years ago) link

it licked his wounds

mark p (Mark P), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:14 (twenty years ago) link

apostrophes are so last century

stevem (blueski), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:15 (twenty years ago) link

theyre the microhouse of punctuation

mark p (Mark P), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:15 (twenty years ago) link

"and then smog licked ott's wounds"

mark p (Mark P), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:17 (twenty years ago) link

Here's my question. I'm proofing this German website which my company had translated into English so we can use it as a resource. When referring to a made-up person, like a subordinate, they alternate between him and her from sentence to sentence, so it will be like:
Giving feedback to a subordinate helps him learn.
Then
Positive rapport helps a subordinate build her self-esteem.
But in the US, we would use him/her, or his/her, like:
Giving feedback to a subordinate helps him/her learn.
But sometimes this can get really tortured. So my question is, when is it appropriate to use "them" or "their" for a single person, like:
Giving feedback to a subordinate helps them learn.
Are you just supposed to use this when it will make things clearer? Or is it grammatically incorrect but tolerated? I really hate "him/her" and would rather keep it the way the Germans wrote it, but it has to be in proper English business grammar.

NA. (Nick A.), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:19 (twenty years ago) link

grammatically incorrect but tolerated etiquette-wise, basically

how abt:
Giving feedback to a subordinate helps him learn (her learn). [and then alternate the order]

mark s (mark s), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:22 (twenty years ago) link

Cor Mark that's even clunkier!

Grammatically incorrect but increasingly tolerated in my experience. In the version of business English our business uses here in England, no-one would even notice. Except the sort of pedants you'd like to irritate.

Tim (Tim), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:24 (twenty years ago) link

just use "him"

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:28 (twenty years ago) link

No it's not: you get a whole sentence followed by an alternative section you can easily ignore. (Because it's in brackets.)

mark s (mark s), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:28 (twenty years ago) link

(nutcase) Yes maybe you're right.

Tim (Tim), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:31 (twenty years ago) link

How about:

Giving feedback to subordinateS helps them learn.

Dilemma solved.

kate (kate), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:32 (twenty years ago) link

just use "him" but put a disclaimer at the bottom telling everyone how much women are valued in the workplace and that you're actually dead politcally correct, like, and you'll be fine...

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:34 (twenty years ago) link

if you're going to start a fight you might as well start it by putting "her" the whole time, and then put a disclaimer at the bottom saying men can eat a bag of dicks

mark s (mark s), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:37 (twenty years ago) link

Use "him/the dog".

Sam (chirombo), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:37 (twenty years ago) link

just include a picture of a german woman with subtitle "him" and youre sorted

mark p (Mark P), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:39 (twenty years ago) link

if you're going to start a fight you might as well start it by putting "her" the whole time,

either or'sgood with me


men can eat a bag of dicks

i live for the day i see this in any corporate communication

Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:40 (twenty years ago) link

kate is OTM.

teeny (teeny), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:41 (twenty years ago) link

just use "her" but put a disclaimer at the bottom telling everyone how much men are valued in the workplace and that you're actually dead politcally correct, like, and you'll be fine...

no, them is acceptable these days, and has been for years

Alan (Alan), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:41 (twenty years ago) link

alternately substitute any instance of him, her, them or theirs with 'rammstein'

mark p (Mark P), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:44 (twenty years ago) link

"giving feedback to a subordinate helps rammstein learn"

mark p (Mark P), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:46 (twenty years ago) link

You could also alternate 'him' and 'her' in different examples - a favourite self-help book technique but never mind. I still don't like 'them' in written English.

Archel (Archel), Thursday, 17 July 2003 12:46 (twenty years ago) link

But it's fine in spoken English?

RickyT (RickyT), Thursday, 17 July 2003 13:59 (twenty years ago) link

What does Nesbit do when describing something possessed by the Psammead.

Pete (Pete), Thursday, 17 July 2003 14:09 (twenty years ago) link

Everything's fine in spoken English, it's in flux and I don't pay attention anyway :)

Archel (Archel), Thursday, 17 July 2003 14:09 (twenty years ago) link

Alternating him and her was the Thing to Do when I was at Hahvahd.

Colin Meeder (Mert), Thursday, 17 July 2003 14:18 (twenty years ago) link

I use Shem to mean both.

Pete (Pete), Thursday, 17 July 2003 14:19 (twenty years ago) link

good point ptee:

things belonging to Cousin It are Cousin It's

mark s (mark s), Thursday, 17 July 2003 14:19 (twenty years ago) link

"Them".

Chris P (Chris P), Thursday, 17 July 2003 14:31 (twenty years ago) link

I use the third person plural rather than any of the other alternatives. If you actually put things into plural as much as possible, that helps.

Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Thursday, 17 July 2003 19:47 (twenty years ago) link

Alternating him and her was the Thing to Do when I was at Hahvahd.

That's what people kept telling me, but I was never that adventurous.

Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 17 July 2003 20:21 (twenty years ago) link

I was going to make Chris's point without solid evidence. Hurrah for 'them'.

N. (nickdastoor), Thursday, 17 July 2003 21:04 (twenty years ago) link

y'know what? that it's/its thing has been bothering me for years and now i know. didn't realise it was that simple. Its like an epiphany ;-)

dog latin (dog latin), Friday, 18 July 2003 01:16 (twenty years ago) link

Using "them" or any other plural pronoun to refer to a singular antecedent is a horrible horrible thing and should be avoided.

It used to be gramatically acceptable to use a masculine pronoun (he, him, etc.) when referring to a person of unspecified gender (you know what I mean.. I can't think of any other way to put it), but now the "he or she"/"his or her" method is the proper form.

I'm not sure if it makes a difference whether you use a slash or the word "or." I suspect that the slash is unacceptable in formal writing.

Curt1s St3ph3ns, Friday, 18 July 2003 02:11 (twenty years ago) link

"giving feedback to a subordinate helps motherfuckers learn," italics or boldface on "learn" obv. possible/encouraged

J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Friday, 18 July 2003 02:33 (twenty years ago) link

"I know what you're thinking. Did s/he fire six shots or only five?"

amateurist (amateurist), Friday, 18 July 2003 03:31 (twenty years ago) link

I suspect that the slash is unacceptable in formal writing.

Unless it's academic writing, and it allows you to make a terrible pun somehow.

jaymc (jaymc), Friday, 18 July 2003 04:31 (twenty years ago) link

but now the "he or she"/"his or her" method is the proper form.

Proper, maybe. But it should be pointed out that if you're having to cram this into your sentence, you;re writing a clumsy sentence, and you should probably drop back and punt.

Kenan Hebert (kenan), Friday, 18 July 2003 04:34 (twenty years ago) link

Not that I don't write clumsy sentences all the time, mind you. It's just that I'm aware of it.

Kenan Hebert (kenan), Friday, 18 July 2003 04:35 (twenty years ago) link

seven months pass...
Quick - is "fact-checking" hyphenated? Or is it "factchecking"? Oh no, they both look weird!

@d@ml (nordicskilla), Monday, 8 March 2004 00:24 (twenty years ago) link

Oh no, that’s not quite what he said,

Wile E. Is President (James Redd and the Blecchs), Thursday, 5 May 2022 17:43 (one year ago) link

I've noticed that the designers of CD inserts almost always finesse the problem by using small block caps for all song titles.

more difficult than I look (Aimless), Thursday, 5 May 2022 18:29 (one year ago) link

What are these CDs you speak of, Mr. Aimless?

Wile E. Is President (James Redd and the Blecchs), Thursday, 5 May 2022 18:31 (one year ago) link

CDs nuts

war mice (hardcore dilettante), Friday, 6 May 2022 18:37 (one year ago) link

CDs? Try to imagine them as shiny, thin plastic coasters full of super-sized MP3s that haven't been filtered through highly lossy algorithms.

more difficult than I look (Aimless), Saturday, 7 May 2022 04:11 (one year ago) link

two weeks pass...

TS Have you got vs. Have you gotten. Is it yet another GBS US/UK divide?

Friend of mine just told me the exact same thing about “is.”

And yesterday sent me a text with a downcased “is” in a title.

Apollo and the Aqueducts (James Redd and the Blecchs), Sunday, 22 May 2022 12:12 (one year ago) link

Oh wait, no, he didn’t, my brane downcased it whilst reading.

Apollo and the Aqueducts (James Redd and the Blecchs), Sunday, 22 May 2022 12:13 (one year ago) link

TS Have you got vs. Have you gotten

do you have?

buffalo tomozzarella (ledge), Sunday, 22 May 2022 12:14 (one year ago) link

have you

mark s, Sunday, 22 May 2022 12:17 (one year ago) link

Not talking about the sense of possession, more like “have you got(ten) to the part about…?”

Apollo and the Aqueducts (James Redd and the Blecchs), Sunday, 22 May 2022 12:40 (one year ago) link

are you at

mark s, Sunday, 22 May 2022 13:02 (one year ago) link

have you any wool?

towards fungal computer (harbl), Sunday, 22 May 2022 13:48 (one year ago) link

What matter have you against me?

Apollo and the Aqueducts (James Redd and the Blecchs), Sunday, 22 May 2022 14:10 (one year ago) link

british people don't consider "gotten" a word iirc

Tracer Hand, Sunday, 22 May 2022 20:09 (one year ago) link

That’s changed a lot recently.

Alba, Sunday, 22 May 2022 20:15 (one year ago) link

You could say they’ve gotten wise to the hip US lingo

we need outrage! we need dicks!! (the table is the table), Sunday, 22 May 2022 20:17 (one year ago) link

ill-gotten is very ordinary present-day uk english (when used of gains, riches, wealth etc)

etymonline.com dates its hip modernity to the 14c: https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=gotten

(ie like many US variants it's older not newer)

mark s, Sunday, 22 May 2022 20:41 (one year ago) link

Best word there is sooterkin.

Apollo and the Aqueducts (James Redd and the Blecchs), Sunday, 22 May 2022 20:43 (one year ago) link

it is a good word definitely

mark s, Sunday, 22 May 2022 20:45 (one year ago) link

I was making a bad joke fwiw

we need outrage! we need dicks!! (the table is the table), Monday, 23 May 2022 00:50 (one year ago) link

I'm not at all keen on 'gotten'. But for that matter I'm not keen on 'got' - a very overused, almost ubiquitous word which I don't find at all pretty. As Mark S has already indicated above, it's often not at all necessary to use this word. In James Redd's example, I would say 'Have you reached ... ?'

the pinefox, Monday, 23 May 2022 09:58 (one year ago) link

be careful or you will get got

Piggy Lepton (La Lechera), Monday, 23 May 2022 14:29 (one year ago) link

So my state has outlawed individual plastic bags, which means you have to bring your own shopping bags to the supermarket and basically everywhere else to carry your purchases away. I went to a small supermarket the other day on a whim and didn't have a bag with me, so I was forced to buy one for 99 cents. Anyway, it says on the side

"Thank You for Shopping With us!"

capitalized exactly like that. Shouldn't that obviously be "Thank You for Shopping with Us!"?

but also fuck you (unperson), Monday, 23 May 2022 16:52 (one year ago) link

Maybe they thought it was a two-letter word and therefore should be capitalized? Or maybe it is some weird patriotic thing.

I used to use a free bag somebody gave me from the NYC DoS or some other agency, but I finally lost it and ending up getting a nice foldable one from the local gift shop that wasn't too expensive which I love, although now I am paranoid since I don't have it on me and don't quite remember where I put it.

Apollo and the Aqueducts (James Redd and the Blecchs), Monday, 23 May 2022 17:03 (one year ago) link

Should be lowercased, I meant to say.

Apollo and the Aqueducts (James Redd and the Blecchs), Monday, 23 May 2022 17:04 (one year ago) link

All lowercase and all caps both solutions to a certain problem.

Apollo and the Aqueducts (James Redd and the Blecchs), Monday, 23 May 2022 17:05 (one year ago) link

CamelCase to thread!

Apollo and the Aqueducts (James Redd and the Blecchs), Monday, 23 May 2022 17:06 (one year ago) link

all lowercase is always correct

mark s, Monday, 23 May 2022 17:16 (one year ago) link

also check yrself once you start proofing plastic bags, there's a lot of vernacular house style out there and you will lose yr mind to no purpose

mark s, Monday, 23 May 2022 17:18 (one year ago) link

all lowercase is always correct

Similar to always dressing in black, like Johnny Cash or Steven Meisel.

Apollo and the Aqueducts (James Redd and the Blecchs), Monday, 23 May 2022 17:19 (one year ago) link

thats right

mark s, Monday, 23 May 2022 17:23 (one year ago) link

Shouldn't that obviously be "Thank You for Shopping with Us!"?

Personally speaking, I'd lose the exclamation point as making them sound over-excitable and perhaps mentally unbalanced.

more difficult than I look (Aimless), Monday, 23 May 2022 17:27 (one year ago) link

Should really be: “Thank You for Shopping with ‘us!’”

Apollo and the Aqueducts (James Redd and the Blecchs), Monday, 23 May 2022 17:31 (one year ago) link

Thank You for Shopping with BIG HOOS aka the streendriver

Apollo and the Aqueducts (James Redd and the Blecchs), Monday, 23 May 2022 17:32 (one year ago) link

Songs where it’s fun to say HOOS in place of the actual plastic bag.

Apollo and the Aqueducts (James Redd and the Blecchs), Monday, 23 May 2022 17:34 (one year ago) link

Perhaps I will start posting in HOOS case.

Apollo and the Aqueducts (James Redd and the Blecchs), Monday, 23 May 2022 17:35 (one year ago) link

DO U see?!

Apollo and the Aqueducts (James Redd and the Blecchs), Monday, 23 May 2022 17:35 (one year ago) link

LET ME TRY this on for size.

Apollo and the Aqueducts (James Redd and the Blecchs), Monday, 23 May 2022 17:36 (one year ago) link

TS: ALL OF A SUDDEN VS. all of the sudden

Apollo and the Aqueducts (James Redd and the Blecchs), Monday, 23 May 2022 19:53 (one year ago) link

one month passes...

Can I use "occasioned" like this?

the publication of X occasioned the first use of some new word

Note that the new word doesn't appear in X itself but appears in a review of X.

Antifa Lockhart (Leee), Thursday, 30 June 2022 22:32 (one year ago) link

It's grammatical enough, and "occasioned" is certainly an accepted word, so I'd say 'yes' to your question.

more difficult than I look (Aimless), Thursday, 30 June 2022 22:44 (one year ago) link

this usage is uncontroversially fine: if i was bored or being testy as an acitivist sub editor i might switch in "saw" or "led to" depending on context (context = nature of nearby sentences acc my picky sub self lol) viz "the publication of X saw the first use of some new word"/"the publication of X led to the first use of some new word"

gloss: if "occasioned" maybe possibly presents a micro-speedbump for a reader, i think "saw" presents none, while "led to" perhaps implies the fact you note, that the new word arrives a little later than X…

mark s, Friday, 1 July 2022 13:26 (one year ago) link

you might also use "prompted"

but your sentence is fine as is imo

budo jeru, Friday, 1 July 2022 15:03 (one year ago) link

Yeah, I think "occasioned" there is a little overwritten and that with a little bit of effort "led to" would be much more readable.

Antifa Lockhart (Leee), Friday, 1 July 2022 16:31 (one year ago) link

one year passes...

saw (a young person) referred to as a 'third-generation holocaust survivor'

obviously the topic is fraught, but it seems like there should be a better way to describe someone whose grandparents survived the camps

mookieproof, Thursday, 11 January 2024 01:55 (three months ago) link

A completely uncontroversial way to say that would be "a grandchild of Holocaust survivors."

And while - as mòokieproof says - it is fraught, it does seem a bit much to imply that you "survived" an event that you did not personally experience.

I am not, personally, a survivor of the Visigothic Sack of Rome, the Protestant Reformation, the Irish Potato Famine, the Trail of Tears, the American Revolution, the Civil War, or school desegregation.

Maybe (stretching this quite a bit) I have experienced some personal effects from the Cold War and/or the Vietnam War due to my parents' participation in them, but calling myself a "survivor" seems more like stolen valor than empathy and solidarity.

CthulhuLululemon (Ye Mad Puffin), Thursday, 11 January 2024 04:19 (three months ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.