From: seanc130@hotmail.com
"Marc" wrote
> That80sGuy wrote:
>> WGRG3@webtv.net done wrote:
>>> So the movie has made almost twice it's budget
>> "Its," not "it's."
> Another example of our shit langage. There is a clear expression of
> possession. Bob's budget. It's budget. Why the difference kajagoogoo?
The difference is that it's is not a possessive. It's a contraction of the
words 'it is'.
You are being misled by applying the rules of possessive *nouns* to
possessive *pronouns*. Its is not analogous to Bob's; it's analogous to
*his* or *hers*. Pronoun, not noun.
That which belongs to it is its (not it's) for the same reason that that
which belongs to him is his (not him's), that which belongs to her is hers
(not her's), that which belongs to you is yours (not your's), that which
belongs to us is ours (not our's), and that which belongs to them is theirs
(not their's).
Of course, that doesn't explain why that which belongs to me is mine. But if
you expect everything to make sense, you are definitely looking at the wrong
language. English is the linguistic equivalent of Washington politics; half
the rules are entirely arbitrary and completely irrational. You just gotta
learn the way it is, and try to forget about the reason *why* it's that way,
because most of the time the answer involves a ten-minute dissertation on
etymological roots tracing back to Germanic and Romantic word ancestors that
essentially were smashed together at random into one great big train wreck
of a language.
--
--Sean
http://spclsd223.livejournal.com
House: [yelling up the stairs] People used to have more respect for
cripples, you know! [looks over at guy in a wheelchair] They didn't, really.
--- SoupGate-DOS v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
