"Whenever" and "Seen"

[phesina]

The one that really bugs me, that I see everywhere these days: people using "it's" when they mean "its."

it's = contraction of "it is"
its = possessive of "it"

[Jessika]

The one that really bugs me, that I see everywhere these days: people using "it's" when they mean "its."

it's = contraction of "it is"
its = possessive of "it"

I'll even have trouble remembering this one because the apostrophe is "backwards" (in my mind, anyway lol). Normally you use the apostrophe to show possession but not in this case. You'd think I would keep that straight, knowing that... but, nope.

[pomtzu]

The one that really bugs me, that I see everywhere these days: people using "it's" when they mean "its."

it's = contraction of "it is"
its = possessive of "it"

I guess I'm always wrong then. I was always taught that an 's after anything, was the possessive of it, as well as being 2 words shortened - where just s is the plural of it. I never knew there was such a word as its. Its would mean that it is plural.

[phesina]

"Its" is possessive of it, just like "his" and "her/hers" are possessives of he and she. No apostrophes.

[pomtzu]

"Its" is possessive of it, just like "his" and "her/hers" are possessives of he and she. No apostrophes.

No wonder they say that English is a very difficult language to learn. There are so many exceptions to the rule. I admire a lot of the folks on this forum whose (or is it who's?? ) native language is NOT English, but speak it so well - better than some who were raised with only English.

As long as I know the point someone is trying to get across, then I'm certainly not going to police their verbage, since I am far from being grammatically correct at all times.

[Willow Oak]

I'd druther hear someone say, "I seen," that's seen somethin', than to say, "I have seen," that ain't seen anythin'!

A "flounder" is a fish; "founder" is what happens when a ship runs aground.

[pomtzu]

[QUOTE=Willow Oak;2428151

A "flounder" is a fish; "founder" is what happens when a ship runs aground.[/QUOTE]

But that ship has to sink below the surface of the water to "founder". If it's above and tossing about against rocks or a reef, wouldn't it be "floundering"?

[pomtzu]

My big pet peeve is "waiting on" and "waiting for". I summed it up back in post #52. That still drives me nuts.

[Willow Oak]

But that ship has to sink below the surface of the water to "founder". If it's above and tossing about against rocks or a reef, wouldn't it be "floundering"?

Language is evolving. That is what drives some of us "mad." When I was in school I was castigated if I spelled "buses" as "busses." Now, the latter spelling appears in dictionaries and has been approved as acceptable. The word "ain't" has become part of many dictionaries. I believe that the word "flounder" was inadvertently used instead of "founder" when someone was lost and trying to find his way (tossed about). Now the dictionaries approve the misuse of the word.

Most of the European languages evolved from Greek and Latin. Latin was the language spoke in ancient Rome, hence the "romance" languages.

Am I preaching to the choir here?

[Karen]

I'd druther hear someone say, "I seen," that's seen somethin', than to say, "I have seen," that ain't seen anythin'!

A "flounder" is a fish; "founder" is what happens when a ship runs aground.

But "I saw," or "I have seen" is correct! "I seen" is not.

[Willow Oak]

But "I saw," or "I have seen" is correct! "I seen" is not.

"I saw" is not correct, if you did not see. Likewise, "I have seen" is not correct if you did not see.

Furthermore, it is grammatically incorrect to begin with a conjunction, such as the word "but."

Still furthermore, it is grammatically incorrect to separate two words or two phrases with a comma when they are separated by the conjunction "or," as in "'I saw,' or 'I have seen.'"

Worse still is correcting the moderator of a forum.