Gaming like there's no tomorrow...

No, I maintain that I'm correct. I'mn't an English major, but I know the basics. My usage of the apostrophe was correct. Also, incase you don't trust wikipedia, here's an article from Bartleby on the same topic. Does anyone else've objections to my grammar in that remark?

 

Next question.

Are we talking American English, Australian English, or real English?


And from what I know, DE did teach English, but has now stopped. And from what I have learnt on my English lessons, the Fool is wrong.

 

Shit, son.... you just got WRECKED

 

The reason why "it's" is not possessive is a bit of an exception...the sort of thing English is famous for.

Consider he and his...it's easy to tell the difference between a contraction of he and is and the possessive male pronoun his; so too with she and her. It is more ambiguous--if we didn't have this rule, there would very limited use for the word its (if you were referring to multiple copies of Stephen King's seminal novel, say, or multiple its in a sentence as I'm sure you often do), and it's would have to pull double duty.

 

I'm not aware of any pronouns that use 's to indicate ownership. Any examples?

 

Well, I looked it up, and it'sn't valid to to use "it's" to represent possession. I retract my arguments. It's, infact, an exemption.

 

Ah, yes, the long and unrelenting hell that was English class. I was good at English, seeing as how I'd had neither TV nor Computer till I was 14 (I read metric fucktons of stuff before the TV spawned in our household, I even finished the entire series of Trixie Belden and Nancy Drew, the former being VASTLY superior). The rest of my class... two intelligent people who liked books, three intelligent people who'd rather have been in chemistry blowing shit up, and twenty-five odd fuckwits who were more interested in fucking each other or examining the contents of their nostrils.

JOY.

 

Nope. It follows that rule well...the exception bit was how it's a 's that doesn't mean possessive.

 

It's generally not appropriate to use contractions like "it'sn't" or words like "Exemption" when arguing grammar. Just saying.

Also, stupid people are universally loved by Social Sciences teachers, because smart students ask too many hard questions. Stop thinking for yourselves, bastards.

 

You are aware that 'exemption' really is a word, right?

EDIT: By the way Grakelin, I've yet to see you post anything even halfway intelligent, or anything deeper than a paper plate. So maybe you should just shut your fucking mouth.

 

You use it in cases of indefinate pronouns. "Somebody's Child" is one. Also, Grakel, my use of excessive contractions is a trademark of mine. Mainly because nobody else's interested in doing so. I also contract words to the word next to it. Even ifn't appropriate. Hey look! Built in example.

source for first portion:
http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000134.htm

 

You've got a damn good point there. School sucked. Being the intelligent person in my school sucked even more. Someone needs to explain to those fuckwits that enjoying reading does not make me retarded, it makes me the exact opposite of retarded.

And kids who have never seen the original Star Trek are not allowed to call people Spock. *grumble*

 

Ah, the joy of reading. I can just thank my teachers for letting me read in school.

Once in fourth grade I was sitting under my chair reading (It was either Tolkien, or Harry Potter.), one of the students told the teacher and she just told her "To let me read".

Might be one of the reason why I never have had many friends in my class, except for the fact that most of them were retards.

 

You just made my day.