0
Anonymous Posted 17 years ago
Linguistics Studies
As a rule...
How solid is this "rule"?
"As a rule, nouns referring to inanimate things should not be in the possessive. Use an “of” phrase instead."
http://blog.instructionalsolutions.com/2008/11/05/inanimate-possessives-two-days-time-or-two-days-time/
"As a rule, nouns referring to inanimate things should not be in the possessive. Use an “of” phrase instead."
http://blog.instructionalsolutions.com/2008/11/05/inanimate-possessives-two-days-time-or-two-days-time/
Top answer
The "rule" has a certain solidarity that has been well detailed in your source. If you take it just at face value, it just makes good sense. The bottom line, as the author suggests, is that the generalization is established, but some exceptions have come to be common in use.
- The "rule" has a certain solidarity that has been well detailed in your source.
- If you take it just at face value, it just makes good sense.
- The bottom line, as the author suggests, is that the generalization is established, but some exceptions have come to be common in use.
- Personally, I don't think the point is worth a great deal of debate.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
3 Answers
0
The "rule" has a certain solidarity that has been well detailed in your source. If you take it just at face value, it just makes good sense. The bottom line, as the author suggests, is that the generalization is established, but some exceptions have come to be common in use.
Personally, I don't think the point is worth a great deal of debate.
Personally, I don't think the point is worth a great deal of debate.
00
<The bottom line, as the author suggests, is that the generalization is established, but some exceptions have come to be common in use.>
The exceptions mentioned at that site refer only to those where time is involved.
"possession does not belong only to people and places, but also to time."
Which would put all of these out in the cold:
See the dog?
The exceptions mentioned at that site refer only to those where time is involved.
"possession does not belong only to people and places, but also to time."
Which would put all of these out in the cold:
See the dog?
00
Hi Anon,
I see no point in asking anybody on the English Forums website whether we are "happy" about a sentence Mary Cullen posted on her own website.
If you would like to protest or criticise what Mary posted on her website last year, it would be more appropriate to contact Mary directly and discuss your point of view with her. Perhaps she will modify her statement. Perhaps no
I see no point in asking anybody on the English Forums website whether we are "happy" about a sentence Mary Cullen posted on her own website.
If you would like to protest or criticise what Mary posted on her website last year, it would be more appropriate to contact Mary directly and discuss your point of view with her. Perhaps she will modify her statement. Perhaps no
0
Related Questions