[Arm-netbook] possessive "it's"

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 4:02 PM,  <chadvellacott at sasktel.net> wrote:

>    [No offense intended.  (:^) ]

 none taken - we're all learning - let's have some fun with this.

>    Those who live in glass houses, should not throw stones.
>    "its" is _not_ a Relative Pronoun.  Relative pronouns are "who what where
> when why how whom whose".

 oh!  yes, sorry, you're right - i meant "possessive pronoun".

>    "it" is a Personal Pronoun, like "he she they".  If it has a possessive
> form, then that form is a Possessive Pronoun (like "theirs"), or else a
> Possessive Pronominal Adjective (like "their").
>    I guess that thou meant the concept of Possessive Pronoun, _not_ Relative
> Pronoun.

 yes i did.  let's take a look, google "its" and that comes up with
two top links one for "its" and one for "it's".  let's look at the one
for "it's":

  http://www.dictionary.com/browse/it-s

Word Origin

See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
1.
   contraction of it is:   It's starting to rain.
2.
   contraction of it has: It's been a long time.

   Can be confused
   it's, its (see confusables note at its )

interesting!  i'll use that one in future, i didn't realise that
"it's" can be a short-hand for "it has".


 Definition:

"pronoun, nominative it, possessive its or (Obsoleteor Dialect) it,
objective it; plural nominative they, possessive their or theirs,
objective them."

 so the word "it" is qualified as a "pronoun", and the word "its" is
defined as a *possessive* pronoun.


the definition in merriam-webster is much less helpful but gives good examples:
    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/its

this one's i can see it's much more helpful:
   http://www.myenglishpages.com/site_php_files/grammar-lesson-possessive-adjectives.php

it's also showing that "its" is a possessive pronoun.  i wonder why i
said "relative pronoun" when in all other instances i've said
"possessive"?  huh.



>    But, I am not aware of any _other_ English word becoming possessive by
> mere "s" withOUT an apostrophe.  So to decide that "its" is possessive,
> seems an unreasonable dogmatic "exception" to the general rule above.

 it's explained here:
 https://www.writingforward.com/grammar/homophones/homophones-its-and-its


>    English usage has many UNreasonable "exceptions" to it's rules.

 ahhh! gotcha!  you mean "english usage has many Unreasonable
"exceptions" to its (possessive pronoun) rules" :)

> So,
> English seems unreasonably difficult to learn as a second language.

 it turns out that numbers, as an example, in all european languages,
cause a huge amount of difficulty for children, resulting in
significantly-delayed development of numerical arithmetic skills.  in
the far east, numbers are really *really* straightforward: 0-9 have
their own word, you just read the digits out using those 0-9 words, to
the point where on the HK stock exchange i heard that people are able
to communicate at ten numbers *PER SECOND* which is phenomenal.  my
friend phil also pointed out to me the "flash-card" technique of
training kids in japan as young as seven and eight to do six-digit
mental arithmetic, where they're expected to have 100% accuracy on
something mad like... i can't remember exactly what he said but i
believe it was in excess of two six-digit sums *per second*.  i may be
underestimating there so as not to trip any "total disbelief verging
on bullshit" mental radars.

 in french, the number "98" is *five syllables* with a massive amount
of physical effort required to morph the mouth between some of the
syllables!  qua-tre vingt dix huit.  pronounced "ka-tr-uh va-i-ngg
dee-ss-wh-ee-t" and translated in english "four-twenty ten-eight"!!

  (This
> is not "sour grapes".  English is my first language, and I did _not_ have
> special trouble with it in school.)
>    Are we unwilling, to abandon arbitrary "exceptions" so that others can
> more-easily learn _our_ _first_ language and communicate with _us_?

 english is the international language for programming, and
programming is about absolute clarity and precision.  so in this *very
specific* field... i'd say yes, absolutely.

 *outside* of the world of computing, whilst it just makes people who
should know better (such as in marketing), it just makes people "look
dumb".  i've seen both BT *and* Shell as recently as 10-15 years ago
put up huge signs across all their stores in the UK make basic
fundamental mistakes with the use of possessive pronouns.

  http://www.copyblogger.com/5-common-mistakes-that-make-you-look-dumb/

 but even if they "look dumb" it's not so critical - it's not so
important in its level of clarity that a product be marketed in its
best possible light, but it's clearly important in its level of
security and effectiveness for a program to be at its most accurately
specified and actioned, as well as being important that it's
well-documented.

>    If a person means "it is", then that is nearly as easy to say and type,
> as "it's".  (With typing on a "QWERTY", the difference is merely- thumb down
> on space-bar and next middle-finger sliding forward to "i", versus little
> finger awkwardly stretching outward to apostrophe.)

 *ROTFL* yeah... the hilarious thing is: it's actually more physical
effort to type the *correct* word "its" than it is to type the wrong
phrase "it's" :)

>    I do not presume that I shall change any one else's mind on this.  (But,
> considering all of the significant evidence that I am aware of, I will not
> change on this.)

 ... and you'd be perfectly within your right to self-determination to
make such a declaration, and to continue to adhere to it for as long
as you perceive it to be useful to you.

now, do allow me to summarise what *my* position is (from the above).
as a hardware engineer in training, and a software engineer, clarity
and unambiguity is absolute and paramount.  one small mistake in
hardware can cost $10,000 or even more.  so with that training (and
level of penalty for not getting it right) comes an in-built "radar'
for pointing out *any* possible ambiguity, especially in written
language.  and that's why i really appreciated you pointing out the
mistake that i made.

l.