

|
 |
| << Topic |
< Post |
Post 18 of 23 Topic 196 of 215
|
Post > |
Topic >> |
Re: The standard Pascal web site, moved and updated!
by "gedumer1" <gedumer1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Dec 6, 2007 at 07:10 PM
| Here's a better example:
Its or It's?
Its is the possessive pronoun; it modifies a noun.
It's is a contraction of it is or it has.
Incorrect: The mother cat carried it's kitten in it's mouth.
(Possessive pronoun, no apostrophe)
Correct: The mother cat carried its kitten in its mouth.
Correct: I think it's going to rain today.
(Contraction of it is)
Correct: It's been a very long time.
(Contraction of it has)
http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000227.htm
Gary.
"gedumer1" <gedumer1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:4806j.20685$rc2.15716@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I'm sorry, but I have to correct Rene... "great improvement on its
> successors" is the correct usage of the word "its". The rule is as
> follows:
>
> It's versus Its.
>
> There's no shortcut; all you can do is memorize the rule. It's with an
> apostrophe means it is (or, a little less often and a little less
> formally, it has); its without an apostrophe means belonging to it. An
> analogue might provide a mnemonic: think of "he's" ("he is" gets an
> apostrophe) and "his" ("belonging to him" doesn't).
>
> What about its', with the apostrophe after the s? - Never, never, never.
> Wrong, wrong, wrong. Not in this language, you don't. Its, "belonging to
> it"; it's, it is. That's all. [Revised 8 June 2001.] see:
> http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Writing/i.html
>
> Scott... you were right the first time. Same goes for "But in it's
> original form". It should be "But in its original form".
>
> Gary.
>
> "scott moore" <nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:DYSdne29eIKEvc_anZ2dnUVZ_tbinZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Rene Kita wrote:
>>> scott moore wrote:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.standardpascal.org
>>>
>>> Thank you for a great site. There is too little about Pascal left on
the
>>> web.
>>>
>>> Two typos, if you don't mind:
>>> *great improvement on it's successors
>>> ->great improvement on its successors
>>> http://www.standardpascal.org
>>>
>>> *renumerations
>>> ->remuneration
>>> http://www.standardpascal.org/compiler.html
>>
>> Thank you thank you, I'll fix that.
>>
>> Scott Moore
>
>


|
23 Posts in Topic:
|
scott moore <nospam@[E |
2007-11-28 01:07:17 |
|
Marco van de Voort <ma |
2007-11-28 14:50:56 |
|
scott moore <nospam@[E |
2007-11-29 23:36:21 |
|
scott moore <nospam@[E |
2007-11-30 00:10:35 |
|
Marco van de Voort <ma |
2007-11-30 08:38:41 |
|
scott moore <nospam@[E |
2007-12-01 19:01:06 |
|
Marco van de Voort <ma |
2007-12-02 12:17:14 |
|
scott moore <nospam@[E |
2007-12-03 23:39:48 |
|
"Chris Burrows" |
2007-12-05 09:57:36 |
|
scott moore <nospam@[E |
2007-12-05 00:41:26 |
|
Marco van de Voort <ma |
2007-12-08 16:45:55 |
|
scott moore <nospam@[E |
2007-12-09 18:06:47 |
|
Richard Engebretson <e |
2007-11-29 06:47:30 |
|
scott moore <nospam@[E |
2007-11-29 23:41:53 |
|
Rene Kita <renekita@[E |
2007-11-30 13:16:24 |
|
scott moore <nospam@[E |
2007-12-01 19:01:45 |
|
"gedumer1" < |
2007-12-06 19:06:24 |
|
"gedumer1" < |
2007-12-06 19:10:15 |
|
"Chris Burrows" |
2007-12-07 13:01:29 |
|
scott moore <nospam@[E |
2007-12-09 18:07:39 |
|
Keith Bowes <keith_bow |
2007-12-23 05:05:29 |
|
Richard Engebretson <e |
2007-11-30 04:10:35 |
|
scott moore <nospam@[E |
2007-12-01 19:00:17 |
|
Post A Reply:

|
|
|
|