Who's vs. Whose 2

it's = it is => who's = who is
its = possessive ==> whose = possessive


--------------
Good Luck
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read
FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

Who's is Who is

Whose is ownership

Who's going to clean the bathroom?

Whose mess is this in the bathroom?

*******************************************************
Occam's Razor - All things being equal, the simplest solution is the right one.

Whose martini is this? And if it's not mine then who's going to make me one?

Who's going to clean the bathroom?

Whose mess is this in the bathroom?

Click to expand...

Sorry, mine. Must've been the stomach bug. I'll get a mop. Whose mop should I use anyway?

gbaughma said:

What is the rule on this? I have a really bad habit of using "who's" (because mentally, I think of the 's showing ownership)

Click to expand...

I think you'll be able to eliminate this confusion if you compare this word to the pronoun "He".

He's (he is) hiding from me again.
Where is his (possessive) desk?
[tab]> > >
It's (it is) hard to hide in this office.
I think that is due to its (possessive) small size.
[tab]> > >
Who's (who is) your daddy?
Stop snickering.
Seriously, whose (possessive) child are you?

[tt][blue]-John[/blue][/tt]
[tab][red]The plural of anecdote is not data[/red]

Help us help you. Please read FAQ 181-2886 before posting.

John,

That's exactly the technique I use to remember it if I have a senior moment. Usually when deciding between "its" and "it's".

Annihilannic.

Another easy method to remember:

When referring to pronouns, an apostrophe never represents possession...It always represents a contraction (such as he's = he is; she's = she is; it's = it is; who's = who is; plus I's = I is <grin>; we's = we is <another grin>, et cetera).

Mufasa
(aka Dave of Sandy, Utah, USA)
[I provide low-cost, remote Database Administration services: www.dasages.com]
“Beware of those that seek to protect you from harm or risk. The cost will be your freedoms and your liberty.”

Generally, if a letter is not missing from a word, an apostrophe is not indicated. There has been a disturbing tendency lately to use apostrophes to indicate plurals. This is dead wrong. It frustrates me to no end.

In addition to contractions, as indicated above, an apostrophe denotes posession.

Example: John's boat

Exception:
its = posessive (belongs to it)
it's = it is



-- Francis
Et cognoscetis veritatem, et veritas liberabit vos.

flapeyre: I too have many pet peeves regarding common usage of language. I'm not sure if it is appropriate to discuss them in this thread or to start my own.

or this may already have been done before

examples:
Irregardless - aaarghh - hate it.
"needless to say" - then why say it? I use "Suffice it to say"
"I gotta let you go" when you mean " I have better things to do than talk to you right now"

Start my own? Continue?

*******************************************************
Occam's Razor - All things being equal, the simplest solution is the right one.

==> Start my own? Continue?
Generally speaking, one should not hijack another's thread.

--------------
Good Luck
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read
FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

I could see this morphing into an Abbot & Costello routine...
[tt]
Costello: Who is at the fire station?

Abbot: Yes, and who's going to go get Who's hose?

Costello: Whose is it?

Abbot: Yes!
[/tt]


Skip,
[sub]
Just traded in my old subtlety...
for a NUANCE![/sub]

flapeyre,
The greengrocers' apostrophe in plurals is not dead wrong, just out-dated. It used to be the acceptable way to form the plural of a foreign-sounding word that ended in a vowel (e.g. folio's), albeit a century of two ago.
Excuse the nit-pick.


soi là, soi carré

I found this via a link on
The relevance to this thread is revealed only at the end.

I found this funny, in a sad kind-of way.

*******************************************************
Occam's Razor - All things being equal, the simplest solution is the right one.

Three possible scenarios:

1. Who's = Pronoun + verb

2. Who's = Possessive proper noun

3. Whose = Pronominal adjective

********

1. If the sentence makes sense by substituting "Who is", then "Who's" is correct.

2. If you can substitute "of Who" after the following noun, then "Who's" is correct.

3. If you can substitute "of whom" after the following noun, then "Whose" is correct.

Examples:

1. Who's here?
Who is here? "Who's" is correct.
"Here" is not a noun, so "whose" is impossible.

2. This is Who's house. "Who" is a proper name.
This is Who is house. "Who's" looks incorrect.
This is the house of Who. "Who's" is correct.

3. This is whose house? "Who" is not a proper name.
This is who is house? "who's" is obviously wrong.
This is the house of whom? "whose" is correct.


mmerlinn


"We've found by experience that people who are careless and sloppy writers are usually also careless and sloppy at thinking and coding. Answering questions for careless and sloppy thinkers is not rewarding." - Eric Raymond

Poor people do not hire employees. If you soak the rich, who are you going to work for?

<There has been a disturbing tendency lately ...
Lately? I remember working at a piano store. Upon our fine new truck a sign was painted, saying "Another load of fine piano's from ... Music". Advertising our nekulturny tendencies all over town.

>Excuse the nit-pick


I'll nit-pick further (twice)

1) since the term greengrocers' apostrophe refers to the using apostrophes incorrectly to form a plural, it follows that when said usage is correct (for example in your suggestion that is was acceptable back in the ... tappety, tappety ... 18th century) it follows that this would not have actually been a greengrocers' apostrophe

2) flapeyre suggested that it was the recent use of apostrophes (lately, I believe they said) that was dead wrong. Given that the usage to which you allude died out before the 19th century, my vote would go with flapeyre

;-)

Thanks, strongm.

Apostrophes to indicate a plural: Still dead as yesterday's fish, and still wrong.

(Note: I misspelled "apostrophe," and Google Chrome's spell check wanted to correct my misspelling to "catastrophe." How appropriate.

-- Francis
Et cognoscetis veritatem, et veritas liberabit vos.

Strongm,
I hadn't taken the 'lately' implication of Flapeyre's post; perhaps rather than nitpick, it might be better expressed as a footnote (in a "Q.I." style) - historical usage begat the Greengrocers' apostrophe. I still use it for "folio's" to annoy our accountants.

soi là, soi carré