"it's" vs. "its" - so few know the difference!!

@Seed,

No....it doesn't. Read Derrida (et al) The interpretation of texts cannot be separated from either the social context in which they were produced, or that of the current reader.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

If you refuse you should be ignored until and unless you decide that you are willing to conform to standards.

Funny - I never took you for a conformist.

1 Reply

@fresco,

Yeah, but Fresco, don't you think that the inadvertent lapse in correct usage, though it does serve as a marker for social and political membership might also indicate a tendency to laxity or lapse in terms of intellectual functioning?

I mean, for the most part, I ignore it - but I have to say that whenever I see someone over and over and over misusing or mispelling words, I come to my own conclusion. I try not to be judgmental about it - but it does lead me to a certain conclusion - I can't lie about it.

2 Replies

@Seed,

But you know what - you can teach and teach and teach someone, but it's still on them to learn it. You can't try to tell me that people are not taught when and how and why to insert apostrophes....I know that they are. Whether they learn it or not is on them.

1 Reply

@aidan,

Quote:

Funny - I never took you for a conformist.

I am not, but the successful use of language is imperative to the well being of the collective. This is important, language has to work, communication has to happen. You will note that I am always in favor of talking, about anything, with anyone. I detest the idiots at a2k who insist that we not talk about certain things, for instance sex law and the sexuality of teenagers, because our habit of not talking about things and to each other harms everyone a great deal.

I am consistent on the importance of communication.

0 Replies

@fresco,

I am sorry, I am not as read up on the deconstruction of proper use of words but I find it to be a bit odd.

Quote:

Deconstruction generally attempts to demonstrate that any text is not a discrete whole but contains several irreconcilable and contradictory meanings; that any text therefore has more than one interpretation

taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deconstruction

That statement says that if I say "I have a dog." That it could be taken to mean many more things then originally intended. How is that possible? It's pretty cut and dry. And years down the line if someone was to find this writing and read what I have written, I am pretty sure it would be cut and dry for them as well, if they have a grasp of the time period of which I come from. As far as I know dog has meant dog for as long as it has been dog. But then again I am not also that read up on the word dog.

Now if there was there a word in the english language that had a funny symbol over one of the letters in the word, and when these writing were found, and say my original writing had been that word, and that symbol had been removed over time, then it is possible for the person interpretating the phrase to give a wrong translation.

0 Replies

@aidan,

aidan wrote:

But you know what - you can teach and teach and teach someone, but it's still on them to learn it. You can't try to tell me that people are not taught when and how and why to insert apostrophes....I know that they are. Whether they learn it or not is on them.

I didn't mean that there aren't people who don't know the difference. I am quite sure there are. I am sure there was someone who read this post and went "OH! that's what they mean!". You learn something new every day. I know I do. I am just saying that, even I find myself writing at times and will type its when I mean it's and because of laziness will not correct myself.

2 Replies

@Seed,

Using "was" instead of "were" sets my teeth on edge. (If I was a king, for instance.) Problem is, I do it all the time myself, see my post, and quickly attempt to correct it.

2 Replies

@Seed,

Quote:

even I find myself writing at times and will type its when I mean it's and because of laziness will not correct myself.

personal pride and respect for the readers of our spew varies.

0 Replies

@aidan,

Yes. I have already admitted to personal irritation and I am aware of the social judgements I subsequently tend to make as a consequence.

But the fact remains that "language", like fashion is constantly changing. Any modern children's book would cause my primary school teacher to turn in her grave, even though "English" as a subject was never "taught" before about 1900 when "the lower classes" needed to be integrated into a standard system. In addition to the socio-historical aspects of language, appeals to "precise meaning" are ultimately based on complete ignorance of the philosophical problems of semantics which indicate that "meaning" is relative to various aspects of "context". In the case of "its" and "it's", these are usually disambiguated by such context rather than reference to a normative rule.

0 Replies

@Phoenix32890,

I think that is more of a spoken issue with me. As hearing someone say that is more of a grind on my nerves then the "it's" "its" issue. When you hear either form of its, there is no way to figure out if they are saying the proper word at all, because in actuality they are. It is only visible that they are using the wrong wrong in writing, unlike "was" "were", were it is possible to figure out in both settings.

0 Replies

I am a grammar libertarian-- the idea that some people think they have the right to dictate how other people communicate is far more annoying than any grammar nit.

The fact is that English has always been a growing language makes the imposition of grammar correctness that much more annoying. Much of modern English is the result of "errors" shortcuts or some collective opinion that things needed to change-- I can now have an agenda or note there is data to support my argument(these were both incorrect not that long ago). I no longer use honorific pronouns (no matter how important thou thinkest thyself).

In spoken English-- what is said is completely up to the speaker. The idea that failing to use the Subjunctive case will lead to misunderstanding is ridiculous.

In written English, I suppose there is room for an editor... but I certainly am not going to waste time complaining. I have received professional documents with silly grammar errors-- doesn't matter a bit.

Let people communicate.

2 Replies

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

I am a grammar libertarian-- the idea that some people think they have the right to dictate how other people communicate is far more annoying than any grammar nit.

The fact is that English has always been a growing language makes the imposition of grammar correctness that much more annoying. Much of modern English is the result of "errors" shortcuts or some collective opinion that things needed to change-- I can now have an agenda or note there is data to support my argument(these were both incorrect not that long ago). I no longer use honorific pronouns (no matter how important thou thinkest thyself).

In spoken English-- what is said is completely up to the speaker. The idea that failing to use the Subjunctive case will lead to misunderstanding is ridiculous.

In written English, I suppose there is room for an editor... but I certainly am not going to waste time complaining. I have received professional documents with silly grammar errors-- doesn't matter a bit.

Let people communicate.

Bravo! Worth quoting in it's entirety.

BTW data are plural, thank you.

Everyone has peeves. They're personal. Unfortunately they seldom remain private. One of mine is grammar nazis. Andrew, I think you're probably wrong in your guess. The other two tags were mine too -- it wasn't a full on assault.

Hawkeye, you've contradicted yourself on this thread. You espouse the need for proper english and grammar and then in the very next post say, "Bullshit, the only purpose for words is to convey meaning, " If the only purpose for words is to convey meaning and someone's meaning is obvious from the words they chose then the specific choice of words isn't important. Get over it.

edit -- I have an equal disdain for fashion nazis...

1 Reply

@JPB,

The word "data" is an interesting case of how our language is changing around us. Dictionaries now acknowledge both the singular and plural construction. The honest truth is that people who insist on using the word "data" as a plural noun (as I usually do) sound like dweebs to most Americans.

I bet that our kids will only use "data" in its singular construction.

0 Replies

their/there/they're issues drive me nuts. if i read the wrong form used i will not read any more from that person.

0 Replies

1 Reply

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

I am a grammar libertarian-- the idea that some people think they have the right to dictate how other people communicate is far more annoying than any grammar nit.

I am a grammar nazi libertarian-- the idea that some people think they have the right to dictate how other people communicate is far more annoying than any grammar nazi.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Quote:

I am a grammar nazi libertarian-- the idea that some people think they have the right to dictate how other people communicate is far more annoying than any grammar nazi.

JSYK, communication is at least a two party process, and all parties have rights. If you want to spend a lot of time trying to decode what someone is trying to say you have the right to do so. You also have the right to decline.

0 Replies

What this discussion reveals is the psychological importance we attach to communication protocols as opposed to "grammar" itself. These protocols are taken to extremes in some cultures (like Japanese). More generally, the topic reflects the essential connection between "self concepts" and "group concepts".

0 Replies

I was googling around a bit on the history of the English language ...

The use of the apostrophe at all in English started in the 16th century. It was taken from French. It originally signified omitted letters. It started to be used for the possessive because originally the standard genitive ending was "-es" (and the possessive apostrophe signifies the missing 'e').

There are some people who think the apostrophe is useless (we speak just fine without a verbal apostrophe) and that we should just get rid of it completely. George Bernard Shaw is listed as a famous proponent of abolishing the apostrophe. There are some words, 'cello for example, in which the apostrophe disappeared over time.

I think getting rid of the thing makes sense.

2 Replies

"it's" vs. "its" - so few know the difference!!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know