Whose vs Who's

whirlpool

I know that the rules of grammar state that (with regards to ownership) 'whose' is the correct one to use and 'who's' is incorrect - but I always find myself writing 'who's!'

Really, 'who's' should be the grammatically correct one, in my humble opinion, and 'whose' is merely a bastardised version!

Are there any grammar rules you disagree with, or find yourself at war with?

Witcher

They have completely different functions, neither is incorrect in the proper context.

reginald

Whore's and Ho's

EoghanIRL

reginald wrote: »

Whore's and Ho's

What he said

MaxSteele

Who gives a flying f*ck ?

whirlpool

MaxSteele wrote: »

Who gives a flying f*ck ?

Me.

EoghanIRL

Maybe this will help

whose – the possessive form of whom.

“The director, whose shares were recently acquired by the company, resigned last week.”

who’s – a contraction of who is. When you see the apostrophe, think “who is”.

“The plaintiff, who’s suing the defendant, is represented by a very competent counsel.”

whirlpool

Blay wrote: »

They have completely different functions, neither is incorrect in the proper context.

Can you give an example of when "who's" can be used to question ownership?

The King of Moo

whirlpool wrote: »

Can you give an example of when "who's" can be used to question ownership?

"Who's ("who is") the owner of this pen?"

As stated above, "who's" is a contraction of "who is" and on occasion, "who has."

whirlpool

EoghanIRL wrote: »

Maybe this will help

whose – the possessive form of whom.

“The director, whose shares were recently acquired by the company, resigned last week.”

who’s – a contraction of who is. When you see the apostrophe, think “who is”.

“The plaintiff, who’s suing the defendant, is represented by a very competent counsel.”

That's true, but I'm referring solely to the possessive form. As your post states, "whose" is correct, but I always find myself writing "who's."

Witcher

whirlpool wrote: »

Can you give an example of when "who's" can be used to question ownership?

If you read my post carefuly...real carefully you'll see I said 'proper context'..look again if you didn't spot that. Anybody who uses "who's" as a possessive is a fcking idiot.

'Who's with me on that one?'

:pac:

Fr_Dougal

Whose your favourite of all the "Doctor Whose".

Makes sense when you think about it really.

EoghanIRL

Blay wrote: »

If you read my post carefuly...real carefully you'll see I said 'proper context'..look again if you didn't spot that. Anybody who uses "who's" as a possessive is a fcking idiot.

'Who's with me on that one?'

:pac:

Lol, me . Whose with me ? :P

whirlpool

Blay wrote: »

If you read my post carefuly...real carefully you'll see I said 'proper context'..look again if you didn't spot that. Anyobody who uses "who's" as a possessive is a fcking idiot.

'Who's with me on that one?'

:pac:

I am fully aware that "who's" is a term that exists. If you look super carefully - super SUPER carefully - at my post, you'll see that I never stated otherwise.

I was referring to one context only - possessive / ownership.

You seem to think I was asking if "who's" is a word that exists at all.

ezra_pound

whirlpool wrote: »

That's true, but I'm referring solely to the possessive form. As your post states, "whose" is correct, but I always find myself writing "who's."

Yes. Whose is only used in that possessive form. All other times you're really just abbreviating who is as who's.

whirlpool

Okay lads, thanks for your replies. But I am fully aware of what the rule is. But congrats on responding telling us all what the rule is.

My question was - are there any grammar rules that you know are right, but just feel wrong to you personally, and as a result you keep using them wrongly.

The King of Moo

whirlpool wrote: »

Okay lads, thanks for your replies. But I am fully aware of what the rule is. But congrats on responding telling us all what the rule is.

My question was - are there any grammar rules that you really just personally feel for whatever reason are wrong, and as a result you keep using them wrongly.

I can't imagine would feel like that - English grammar is a very intricate, elegant system with a sound logic underpinning it.
Sure, there are quite a few irregularities, but even most of them make sense within the overall system.

There are a few areas of grammar wherein I think it's not very important to be exactly correct, but there's nothing about grammar I'd disagree with. It's stayed the way it has for hundreds of years for a reason: it works.

ezra_pound

whirlpool wrote: »

Okay lads, thanks for your replies. But I am fully aware of what the rule is. But congrats on responding telling us all what the rule is.

My question was - are there any grammar rules that you know are right, but just feel wrong to you personally, and as a result you keep using them wrongly.

Well you also stated that you disagree with the rules and think that who's should be used for whose. This implies that you don't get that the apostrophe is the abbreviated i of is.

caste_in_exile

I always check, if a woman is taken before introducing myself I ask the room "Whose who" and I suggest u similarly get some class, folks...

Xavi6

This is like that other thread where some fecker disliked 'Your / You're' :mad:

Your 'humble opinion' is wrong.

Stop using contractions for a month and your english will improve.

Davidius

's for possession doesn't really seem to be done with the most used pronouns in writing though, ex: his and its (also yours, hers, theirs which comes from adding 's). I don't think this is so much the grammar itself as much as it is asking for the writing system to change how it marks a certain feature of grammar. The most used possessive pronouns don't seem to take apostrophes in writing.

In principle "whose" is "who +'s " probably (with 's being the possessive clitic), just as "its" is "it + 's " and "yours" is "your + 's ". Maybe we could start giving them apostrophes. It'd make 'his' feel like a freak.

Scanlas The 2nd

whirlpool wrote: »

Okay lads, thanks for your replies. But I am fully aware of what the rule is. But congrats on responding telling us all what the rule is.

My question was - are there any grammar rules that you know are right, but just feel wrong to you personally, and as a result you keep using them wrongly.

No, why do you feel whose and who's is wrong?

mathepac

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Whose your favourite of all the "Doctor Whose".

Makes sense when you think about it really.

Not to me I'm afraid. I'd be inclined to write "Who's your favourite of all the "Doctor Whos?" or even "Who's your favourite of all the "Doctors Who?", both with the question mark at the end signifying a real question rather than the stupid antipodean interrogative with the rising inflection at the end of a sentence.

Fr_Dougal

mathepac wrote: »

Not to me I'm afraid. I'd be inclined to write "Who's your favourite of all the "Doctor Whos?" or even "Who's your favourite of all the "Doctors Who?", both with the question mark at the end signifying a real question rather than the stupid antipodean interrogative with the rising inflection at the end of a sentence.

:rolleyes:

pickarooney

I will never say "aren't I".

anncoates

MaxSteele wrote: »

Who gives a flying f*ck ?

Pedants and punctilious ****, generally.

biko

Or people used to reading "bukes" that get slightly confused when they see improper English*



*probably 5 mistakes in that sentence alone.

Eoin

whirlpool wrote: »

Can you give an example of when "who's" can be used to question ownership?

"There is Doctor Who's Tardis"

The King of Moo

pickarooney wrote: »

I will never say "aren't I".

It always sounds wrong to my ear actually, and I never say it too, though I know it is grammatically correct.

If it came up in class I'd teach it as the correct form, but in everyday speech I've no problem with an "am I not?" or even an "amn't I?" Particularly because I'm sure the main reason behind "aren't I" being strictly correct is because "amn't I" sounded a bit common to some.