Search results for 'tag:Genitives tag:Regards' matching tags 'Genitives' and 'Regards'

Re: Each other's way/each others' way

Cool Breeze — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 16:28:47 GMT

English is nearly consistent and logical with regard to the position of the genitive apostrophe. If there is no s at the end of the word in its basic form, the apostrophe comes before the genitive s. In other words, your first sentence is correct.

We like each other.
Not: We like each others.

Therefore: We like each other's names.

CB

Re: About the meaning of "where"

Velimir — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:56:07 GMT

Hello again,

Unfortunately,I've put one part in my previous post wrongly.Sorry for that.It would be correct to use the preposition "toward" in the following part:

"But,if the verb indicates motion,or in plain english,if you are :going toward, flying toward, traveling toward.."

What I've stated after that would be true now,i.e the following noun will be in the dative case.But,if the stress is on the final destination of flying,traveling,going..then the following noun will be in the accusative case,necessarily preceded with the preposition "to".(the preposition "to" perfectly match serbian "za",as attendant to the verbs of motion).
Although the case of a noun is influenced by the verb,modifying adjective(and its case),number(and its case)and gender of that noun,the case of the noun is most heavily influenced by the preceding preposition,if it is present.If the noun is not preceded with a preposition then other factors will determine the case of the noun.The importance of the preposition is apparent in the following example:

I arrived in London. - the noun "London" is in the accusative case

I arrived from London. - the noun "London" is in the genitive case

I suppose that it would require serious contemplation to explain all aspects of the "case" in any language,and additional comparison with english would make it really painful.

Best regards

Re: a genitive of classification?

Believer — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 11:11:54 GMT

Thank you, CalfJim.

You wrote:

My daughter goes to a girls' school. This one is possible. A school for girls. It seems to me that this version without the apostrophe is also common. You might wait for a second opinion on this. >>

In regard to my initial question of whether an article is used in "lions' den" in normal situations, I believe your response was that it is used. Would you say, then, it is similar, if not alike, to the one I quoted above? "a girls' school" means "a school for girls" and "a lions' den" denotes "a den for lions" (or something similar to that ...)

Let us assume plumbers hold their annual conference in a big city. I think the distinction can be made between "a plumbers' conference" and "a plumbers conference" based on whether you are focusing on their possession of the conference or their membership part of the conference. I am writing this but I do not know how to apply this in real world.

Possible name for a center to help local runaway children in the Nowhere city? Nowhere Runaway Children Help Center?? Why not? Nowhere Runaway Children's Help Center

Possible name for a center to help local battered women in the Nowhere city? Nowhere Battered Women Help Center?? Why not? Nowhere Battered Women's Help Center.

Would you say the first choices are better because they are focusing on the group (membership) part of the conference? My big question is "How would you know whether a name is focusing on its membership or its possession of the entity?" I think that will help me put the apostrophe in the right place. It seems to be clear that women and children don't own the centers for the examples above.

Re: saxon genitive once again :)

Anonymous — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 22:56:15 GMT

Thank you both for your effort.
It is highly appreciated and has helped me a lot in my frustrating studies

If you don't mind, take a look at this:

bird's nest - the nest of the bird
birds' nest - the nest of more than one bird
birds nest - nest is a verb means "birds are building up their dwellings"
(I found another one "girls school" and here I am not sure whether is it the same principle or even if this construction is possible or not)
bird nest - if anybody do know what it means, please, let me know. My guess is that it is just two-word noun saying which "kind of animals"
has built it.

Best regards!!!
[]

Re: saxon genitive once again :)

Hoa Thai — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 05:08:07 GMT

Hi,

The majority of my club's new English learners often generalize B of A = A's B or vice versa. The formulae do not always work as Grammar Geek pointed out. I use them sparingly unless I sense that B is a member of A set, such as: the cadets of the school = the school's cadets, or the windows of the house = the house's windows; or an ownership - for example, the cottage of the Jones = the Jones's cottage. Even with that guide, I wonder whether an exception does exist!?

Regarding genitive case, the word genitive is broader than the term possessive. Below are a few examples:

John's house = the house that John owns (simple ownership).
John's block = the block that John lives on (John does not own the block, unless he is a gangster or mafia boss).
The children's books = the books that are written for the children (the children do not own the books).
The slaves' master = the master owns the slaves (the possessive is for the possessed rather than the possessor).

That said, I wish I could find a way to pin down a few rules of thumb that we can all rely on. So far, I've not been able to do so .

Best Regards,
Hoa Thai

Re: genitive 's or of

Anonymous — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 16:52:31 GMT

The genistive 's can be used for

people: John's car

organisations: the administration's agenda

time phrases: a week's pay, in a year's time

astrological bodies: the sun's rays

Your examples of non-people, non-animal ['s] fall under one of the other 3 sub-headings

Hope this helps

Kind regards

Alison

Fed someone's bread

Anonymous — Thu, 31 May 2007 23:45:34 GMT

Hi !

Could you please, tell me what's the meaning of the following sentence (it's a tongue twister)? I know the meaning of each word , but I can't understand them into it:

"Fred fed Ted bread, and Ted fed Fred bread. And by the way shouldn't it be : ... Ted's bread and Fred's bread? (if not, why ? Because it's a genitive case, isn't it?).

Best regards,

Morris

Re: genitive

Hela — Mon, 23 Jan 2006 10:14:12 GMT

Dear MrP and all the other teachers,

1) So what we call "the genitive case" is the apostrophe s and the relative whose, and the "possessive case" is any expression with of to express possession? Would you please give me sentences where we CANNOT use the 's but rather the of form?

2) Would you please tell me more about factors concerning abstract nouns and give me examples of temporal, locative, human activity (and others perhaps) genitives?

3) What about : "Treasure Islandâs author, Robert Louis Stevenson, was a Scotsman born in Edinburgh in 1850."

In which category would you put "titles of books"? Proper noun = concrete noun?

4) Are these wrong ?
The leach of the dog. / The car's door is open.

5) Would you please give me a sentence where a possessive is added to the names of planets: Earth's, Saturn's, Pluto's .....

6) How do you explain this use : The blue bike is my cousin's.

7) And why do we say:
a) The Song of Solomon and the Gospel of John are two of the most beautiful books of the Bible.
b) The computer's hard drive is broken.

Kind regards, Hela

Re: saxon genitive question...

goldmund — Tue, 20 Sep 2005 13:12:15 GMT

Dear Patatasfritas,

It is I believe as you have said. In the first sentence we regard John and Mary as individual. In the second sentence we regard them as a couple.

Kind regards,

Goldmund

Re: About English plural 's'

Su Cheng Zhong — Wed, 02 Mar 2005 23:58:55 GMT

korin said:
>Over approximately 1500 years, the mammoth set of inflections of the Old English has virtually been discarded leaving only 's' (plural nouns, 3rd person singular verbs, and saxon genitive) in modern English. English has become a rather analytic lg, where most of the syntactic relations within a sentence are expressed by means of word order.
I always confused by the 3rd person singular verbs. If some one like, can you explain the following sentence, for me?
"Jones shake(s) hand(s) with Tom."
The question is that how we calssify the subject and object, singular or plural? I always wonder that the shaking hand(s) is like the meaning of shaking a bar. For shaking hand(s) means that you wave your hand and cause other hand waving. So it should be 'Jones shakes Tom's hand', not 'Jones shakes hands with Tom'. For Jones' hand is initiative and Tom's hand is passive. If you regard both hand were shaken simultaneously, then, who are (is) subject? Are both Jones and Tom are subject? Then we have to say, 'Jones and Tom shake hands.'