Is there a rule that prohibits us from using 2 possessives in a row?Using the genitive with “this week”How is the “'s” related to the death of a person or of an animalAll this is Kim'sUsing “This” instead of “That”“X's Y” vs “Y of X”Is the apostrophe used correctly in “people's interest in their ancestor's family…”?When can uniquness and reminiscence be cancellable?Using the Saxon genitive or not?Usage and omission of “any”MY old friend VS an old friend OF MINE
Different PCB color ( is it different material? )
Future enhancements for the finite element method
Can an old DSLR be upgraded to match modern smartphone image quality
Mother abusing my finances
What are the benefits of cryosleep?
Is there an evolutionary advantage to having two heads?
Are there regional foods in Westeros?
What's the most polite way to tell a manager "shut up and let me work"?
If Sweden was to magically float away, at what altitude would it be visible from the southern hemisphere?
Could IPv6 make NAT / port numbers redundant?
Why to use water tanks from Space shuttle in museum?
Did airlines fly their aircraft slower in response to oil prices in the 1970s?
If a massive object like Jupiter flew past the Earth how close would it need to come to pull people off of the surface?
How can I grammatically understand "Wir über uns"?
What are the problems in teaching guitar via Skype?
My player wants to cast multiple charges of magic missile from a wand
The deliberate use of misleading terminology
What does "Marchentalender" on the front of a postcard mean?
A "distinguishing" family of subsets
Why were the Night's Watch required to be celibate?
How did early x86 BIOS programmers manage to program full blown TUIs given very few bytes of ROM/EPROM?
Could I be denied entry into Ireland due to medical and police situations during a previous UK visit?
Is floating in space similar to falling under gravity?
Thousands and thousands of words
Is there a rule that prohibits us from using 2 possessives in a row?
Using the genitive with “this week”How is the “'s” related to the death of a person or of an animalAll this is Kim'sUsing “This” instead of “That”“X's Y” vs “Y of X”Is the apostrophe used correctly in “people's interest in their ancestor's family…”?When can uniquness and reminiscence be cancellable?Using the Saxon genitive or not?Usage and omission of “any”MY old friend VS an old friend OF MINE
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
An English teacher made a comment on my usage of the phrase, "Our last week's meeting", saying that it should be, "last week's meeting", is there a rule for this?
possessives determiners
add a comment |
An English teacher made a comment on my usage of the phrase, "Our last week's meeting", saying that it should be, "last week's meeting", is there a rule for this?
possessives determiners
add a comment |
An English teacher made a comment on my usage of the phrase, "Our last week's meeting", saying that it should be, "last week's meeting", is there a rule for this?
possessives determiners
An English teacher made a comment on my usage of the phrase, "Our last week's meeting", saying that it should be, "last week's meeting", is there a rule for this?
possessives determiners
possessives determiners
edited 6 hours ago
Jasper
20.8k44176
20.8k44176
asked 9 hours ago
hey_youhey_you
1162
1162
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
I've answered essentially the same question over at english.stackexchange.com: Why is “our today's meeting” wrong?
Usually, a noun phrase in English must have exactly one determiner: you can say "I drove this car" or "I drove my car", but not "I drove car" or "I drove this my car".
Certain nouns (such as plural nouns and proper nouns) don't need determiners: "I love bees", "I love milk", "I love Paris", "I love biology". But it's never acceptable for a noun phrase to have more than one determiner (with possible extremely rare exceptions).
"Our last week's meeting" is unacceptable because the noun phrase "meeting" has two determiners, "our" and "last week's". It would also be unacceptable to say "the today's meeting" or "our the meeting".
Here are some phrases which may seem to have multiple determiners, but don't actually:
- your father's home - this noun phrase has only one determiner, namely, "your father's". Meanwhile, the phrase "your father" is also a noun phrase which only has one determiner, namely, "your".
- the brass men's wristwatches - the determiner of this noun phrase is "the", and "brass" and "men's" are adjectives.
- an old people's home - the determiner of this noun phrase is "an". The phrase "old people's home" is an idiom which acts as a simple noun, even though it looks like it contains a determiner.
Perhaps I've been reading too much fiction, but I initially parsed "the brass men's wristwatches" as wristwatches worn by literal brass-men, and not men's wristwatches made of brass.
– mbrig
1 hour ago
1
As it happens, I spent several minutes trying to think of an adjective which could reasonably modify "wristwatches" but not "men". :)
– Tanner Swett
1 hour ago
@Tanner Swett "Timex" or "Rolex" or "fully wound"
– David Siegel
32 mins ago
add a comment |
Our last week's meeting
is a little akward, but I for one do not think that it is incorrect.
The answer by Tanner Swett says "it's never acceptable for a noun phrase to have more than one determiner." However, the Wikipedia article lists eight different "common" cases where multiple determiners are acceptable. Specifically:
- A definite determiner can be followed by certain quantifiers (the many problems, these three things, my very few faults).
- The words all and both can be followed by a definite determiner (all the green apples, both the boys), which can also be followed by a quantifier as above (all the many outstanding issues).
- The word all can be followed by a cardinal number (all three things).
- The word some can be followed by a cardinal number (some eight packets, meaning "approximately eight").
- Words and phrases expressing fractions and multiples, such as half, double, twice, three times, etc. can be followed by a definite determiner: half a minute, double the risk, twice my age, three times my salary, three-quarters the diameter, etc.
- The words such and exclamative-what can be followed by an indefinite article (as mentioned in the section above).
- The word many can be used with the indefinite article and a singular noun (many a night, many an awkward moment).
- The words each and every can be followed by a cardinal number or other expression of definite quantity (each two seats, every five grams of flour).
...
As with other parts of speech, it is often possible to connect determiners of the same type with the conjunctions and and or: his and her children, two or three beans.
The same answer says that "I drove this my car" is wrong. The form "this" followed by a possessive is now rare, but was once more common, especially in formal writing. In particular sentences such as:
It is a mistake to regard aspects of this our present society as unchangeable rules.
were sufficiently common to be a style marker in the writings of the late Robert A Heinlein.
Since the question title asks about using "two possessives in a row", this can certainly be proper.
- This was John's father's watch.
- This was King Mark's wife's cousin's castle.
are both quite correct.
1
Also this my will and this 29th of May 2019 - not common but not wrong. The Wikipedia article is just counting things as determiners that @TannerSwett is not counting, I think. I don't think it is really saying anything different. Anyway our last week's meeting does not come under any of the eight exceptions, as far as I can see, and to me it is so obviously wrong that it would take a lot more than a Wikipedia article to convince me otherwise.
– Minty
2 hours ago
@Minty then we must agree to differ. I would think "our today's meeting" so odd as to be wrong, but "our last week's meeting" unusual but acceptable, leaving aside the case of Indian English, where it seems to be the usual form.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
I can't imagine what logic would permit one of those constructions but not the other. Anyway I think the this... exceptions are more interesting. There must be some explanation but for now it escapes me. I don't think they come from e.g. this (my will, that is).
– Minty
2 hours ago
@Minty I don't think there is any true logic here, merely a pattern of usage. But then i think the attempt to find a fully logical rule in English grammar is often futile and wrongheaded. I agree that the constructions 'this"+possessive pronoun+noun or noun phrase are interesting, and i don't know their origin.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
add a comment |
It's either:
Last week's meeting
or:
Our meeting last week
but I agree with your teacher that:
Our last week's meeting
sounds awkward and should probably be avoided.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "481"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f212566%2fis-there-a-rule-that-prohibits-us-from-using-2-possessives-in-a-row%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
I've answered essentially the same question over at english.stackexchange.com: Why is “our today's meeting” wrong?
Usually, a noun phrase in English must have exactly one determiner: you can say "I drove this car" or "I drove my car", but not "I drove car" or "I drove this my car".
Certain nouns (such as plural nouns and proper nouns) don't need determiners: "I love bees", "I love milk", "I love Paris", "I love biology". But it's never acceptable for a noun phrase to have more than one determiner (with possible extremely rare exceptions).
"Our last week's meeting" is unacceptable because the noun phrase "meeting" has two determiners, "our" and "last week's". It would also be unacceptable to say "the today's meeting" or "our the meeting".
Here are some phrases which may seem to have multiple determiners, but don't actually:
- your father's home - this noun phrase has only one determiner, namely, "your father's". Meanwhile, the phrase "your father" is also a noun phrase which only has one determiner, namely, "your".
- the brass men's wristwatches - the determiner of this noun phrase is "the", and "brass" and "men's" are adjectives.
- an old people's home - the determiner of this noun phrase is "an". The phrase "old people's home" is an idiom which acts as a simple noun, even though it looks like it contains a determiner.
Perhaps I've been reading too much fiction, but I initially parsed "the brass men's wristwatches" as wristwatches worn by literal brass-men, and not men's wristwatches made of brass.
– mbrig
1 hour ago
1
As it happens, I spent several minutes trying to think of an adjective which could reasonably modify "wristwatches" but not "men". :)
– Tanner Swett
1 hour ago
@Tanner Swett "Timex" or "Rolex" or "fully wound"
– David Siegel
32 mins ago
add a comment |
I've answered essentially the same question over at english.stackexchange.com: Why is “our today's meeting” wrong?
Usually, a noun phrase in English must have exactly one determiner: you can say "I drove this car" or "I drove my car", but not "I drove car" or "I drove this my car".
Certain nouns (such as plural nouns and proper nouns) don't need determiners: "I love bees", "I love milk", "I love Paris", "I love biology". But it's never acceptable for a noun phrase to have more than one determiner (with possible extremely rare exceptions).
"Our last week's meeting" is unacceptable because the noun phrase "meeting" has two determiners, "our" and "last week's". It would also be unacceptable to say "the today's meeting" or "our the meeting".
Here are some phrases which may seem to have multiple determiners, but don't actually:
- your father's home - this noun phrase has only one determiner, namely, "your father's". Meanwhile, the phrase "your father" is also a noun phrase which only has one determiner, namely, "your".
- the brass men's wristwatches - the determiner of this noun phrase is "the", and "brass" and "men's" are adjectives.
- an old people's home - the determiner of this noun phrase is "an". The phrase "old people's home" is an idiom which acts as a simple noun, even though it looks like it contains a determiner.
Perhaps I've been reading too much fiction, but I initially parsed "the brass men's wristwatches" as wristwatches worn by literal brass-men, and not men's wristwatches made of brass.
– mbrig
1 hour ago
1
As it happens, I spent several minutes trying to think of an adjective which could reasonably modify "wristwatches" but not "men". :)
– Tanner Swett
1 hour ago
@Tanner Swett "Timex" or "Rolex" or "fully wound"
– David Siegel
32 mins ago
add a comment |
I've answered essentially the same question over at english.stackexchange.com: Why is “our today's meeting” wrong?
Usually, a noun phrase in English must have exactly one determiner: you can say "I drove this car" or "I drove my car", but not "I drove car" or "I drove this my car".
Certain nouns (such as plural nouns and proper nouns) don't need determiners: "I love bees", "I love milk", "I love Paris", "I love biology". But it's never acceptable for a noun phrase to have more than one determiner (with possible extremely rare exceptions).
"Our last week's meeting" is unacceptable because the noun phrase "meeting" has two determiners, "our" and "last week's". It would also be unacceptable to say "the today's meeting" or "our the meeting".
Here are some phrases which may seem to have multiple determiners, but don't actually:
- your father's home - this noun phrase has only one determiner, namely, "your father's". Meanwhile, the phrase "your father" is also a noun phrase which only has one determiner, namely, "your".
- the brass men's wristwatches - the determiner of this noun phrase is "the", and "brass" and "men's" are adjectives.
- an old people's home - the determiner of this noun phrase is "an". The phrase "old people's home" is an idiom which acts as a simple noun, even though it looks like it contains a determiner.
I've answered essentially the same question over at english.stackexchange.com: Why is “our today's meeting” wrong?
Usually, a noun phrase in English must have exactly one determiner: you can say "I drove this car" or "I drove my car", but not "I drove car" or "I drove this my car".
Certain nouns (such as plural nouns and proper nouns) don't need determiners: "I love bees", "I love milk", "I love Paris", "I love biology". But it's never acceptable for a noun phrase to have more than one determiner (with possible extremely rare exceptions).
"Our last week's meeting" is unacceptable because the noun phrase "meeting" has two determiners, "our" and "last week's". It would also be unacceptable to say "the today's meeting" or "our the meeting".
Here are some phrases which may seem to have multiple determiners, but don't actually:
- your father's home - this noun phrase has only one determiner, namely, "your father's". Meanwhile, the phrase "your father" is also a noun phrase which only has one determiner, namely, "your".
- the brass men's wristwatches - the determiner of this noun phrase is "the", and "brass" and "men's" are adjectives.
- an old people's home - the determiner of this noun phrase is "an". The phrase "old people's home" is an idiom which acts as a simple noun, even though it looks like it contains a determiner.
answered 5 hours ago
Tanner SwettTanner Swett
1,678611
1,678611
Perhaps I've been reading too much fiction, but I initially parsed "the brass men's wristwatches" as wristwatches worn by literal brass-men, and not men's wristwatches made of brass.
– mbrig
1 hour ago
1
As it happens, I spent several minutes trying to think of an adjective which could reasonably modify "wristwatches" but not "men". :)
– Tanner Swett
1 hour ago
@Tanner Swett "Timex" or "Rolex" or "fully wound"
– David Siegel
32 mins ago
add a comment |
Perhaps I've been reading too much fiction, but I initially parsed "the brass men's wristwatches" as wristwatches worn by literal brass-men, and not men's wristwatches made of brass.
– mbrig
1 hour ago
1
As it happens, I spent several minutes trying to think of an adjective which could reasonably modify "wristwatches" but not "men". :)
– Tanner Swett
1 hour ago
@Tanner Swett "Timex" or "Rolex" or "fully wound"
– David Siegel
32 mins ago
Perhaps I've been reading too much fiction, but I initially parsed "the brass men's wristwatches" as wristwatches worn by literal brass-men, and not men's wristwatches made of brass.
– mbrig
1 hour ago
Perhaps I've been reading too much fiction, but I initially parsed "the brass men's wristwatches" as wristwatches worn by literal brass-men, and not men's wristwatches made of brass.
– mbrig
1 hour ago
1
1
As it happens, I spent several minutes trying to think of an adjective which could reasonably modify "wristwatches" but not "men". :)
– Tanner Swett
1 hour ago
As it happens, I spent several minutes trying to think of an adjective which could reasonably modify "wristwatches" but not "men". :)
– Tanner Swett
1 hour ago
@Tanner Swett "Timex" or "Rolex" or "fully wound"
– David Siegel
32 mins ago
@Tanner Swett "Timex" or "Rolex" or "fully wound"
– David Siegel
32 mins ago
add a comment |
Our last week's meeting
is a little akward, but I for one do not think that it is incorrect.
The answer by Tanner Swett says "it's never acceptable for a noun phrase to have more than one determiner." However, the Wikipedia article lists eight different "common" cases where multiple determiners are acceptable. Specifically:
- A definite determiner can be followed by certain quantifiers (the many problems, these three things, my very few faults).
- The words all and both can be followed by a definite determiner (all the green apples, both the boys), which can also be followed by a quantifier as above (all the many outstanding issues).
- The word all can be followed by a cardinal number (all three things).
- The word some can be followed by a cardinal number (some eight packets, meaning "approximately eight").
- Words and phrases expressing fractions and multiples, such as half, double, twice, three times, etc. can be followed by a definite determiner: half a minute, double the risk, twice my age, three times my salary, three-quarters the diameter, etc.
- The words such and exclamative-what can be followed by an indefinite article (as mentioned in the section above).
- The word many can be used with the indefinite article and a singular noun (many a night, many an awkward moment).
- The words each and every can be followed by a cardinal number or other expression of definite quantity (each two seats, every five grams of flour).
...
As with other parts of speech, it is often possible to connect determiners of the same type with the conjunctions and and or: his and her children, two or three beans.
The same answer says that "I drove this my car" is wrong. The form "this" followed by a possessive is now rare, but was once more common, especially in formal writing. In particular sentences such as:
It is a mistake to regard aspects of this our present society as unchangeable rules.
were sufficiently common to be a style marker in the writings of the late Robert A Heinlein.
Since the question title asks about using "two possessives in a row", this can certainly be proper.
- This was John's father's watch.
- This was King Mark's wife's cousin's castle.
are both quite correct.
1
Also this my will and this 29th of May 2019 - not common but not wrong. The Wikipedia article is just counting things as determiners that @TannerSwett is not counting, I think. I don't think it is really saying anything different. Anyway our last week's meeting does not come under any of the eight exceptions, as far as I can see, and to me it is so obviously wrong that it would take a lot more than a Wikipedia article to convince me otherwise.
– Minty
2 hours ago
@Minty then we must agree to differ. I would think "our today's meeting" so odd as to be wrong, but "our last week's meeting" unusual but acceptable, leaving aside the case of Indian English, where it seems to be the usual form.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
I can't imagine what logic would permit one of those constructions but not the other. Anyway I think the this... exceptions are more interesting. There must be some explanation but for now it escapes me. I don't think they come from e.g. this (my will, that is).
– Minty
2 hours ago
@Minty I don't think there is any true logic here, merely a pattern of usage. But then i think the attempt to find a fully logical rule in English grammar is often futile and wrongheaded. I agree that the constructions 'this"+possessive pronoun+noun or noun phrase are interesting, and i don't know their origin.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Our last week's meeting
is a little akward, but I for one do not think that it is incorrect.
The answer by Tanner Swett says "it's never acceptable for a noun phrase to have more than one determiner." However, the Wikipedia article lists eight different "common" cases where multiple determiners are acceptable. Specifically:
- A definite determiner can be followed by certain quantifiers (the many problems, these three things, my very few faults).
- The words all and both can be followed by a definite determiner (all the green apples, both the boys), which can also be followed by a quantifier as above (all the many outstanding issues).
- The word all can be followed by a cardinal number (all three things).
- The word some can be followed by a cardinal number (some eight packets, meaning "approximately eight").
- Words and phrases expressing fractions and multiples, such as half, double, twice, three times, etc. can be followed by a definite determiner: half a minute, double the risk, twice my age, three times my salary, three-quarters the diameter, etc.
- The words such and exclamative-what can be followed by an indefinite article (as mentioned in the section above).
- The word many can be used with the indefinite article and a singular noun (many a night, many an awkward moment).
- The words each and every can be followed by a cardinal number or other expression of definite quantity (each two seats, every five grams of flour).
...
As with other parts of speech, it is often possible to connect determiners of the same type with the conjunctions and and or: his and her children, two or three beans.
The same answer says that "I drove this my car" is wrong. The form "this" followed by a possessive is now rare, but was once more common, especially in formal writing. In particular sentences such as:
It is a mistake to regard aspects of this our present society as unchangeable rules.
were sufficiently common to be a style marker in the writings of the late Robert A Heinlein.
Since the question title asks about using "two possessives in a row", this can certainly be proper.
- This was John's father's watch.
- This was King Mark's wife's cousin's castle.
are both quite correct.
1
Also this my will and this 29th of May 2019 - not common but not wrong. The Wikipedia article is just counting things as determiners that @TannerSwett is not counting, I think. I don't think it is really saying anything different. Anyway our last week's meeting does not come under any of the eight exceptions, as far as I can see, and to me it is so obviously wrong that it would take a lot more than a Wikipedia article to convince me otherwise.
– Minty
2 hours ago
@Minty then we must agree to differ. I would think "our today's meeting" so odd as to be wrong, but "our last week's meeting" unusual but acceptable, leaving aside the case of Indian English, where it seems to be the usual form.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
I can't imagine what logic would permit one of those constructions but not the other. Anyway I think the this... exceptions are more interesting. There must be some explanation but for now it escapes me. I don't think they come from e.g. this (my will, that is).
– Minty
2 hours ago
@Minty I don't think there is any true logic here, merely a pattern of usage. But then i think the attempt to find a fully logical rule in English grammar is often futile and wrongheaded. I agree that the constructions 'this"+possessive pronoun+noun or noun phrase are interesting, and i don't know their origin.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Our last week's meeting
is a little akward, but I for one do not think that it is incorrect.
The answer by Tanner Swett says "it's never acceptable for a noun phrase to have more than one determiner." However, the Wikipedia article lists eight different "common" cases where multiple determiners are acceptable. Specifically:
- A definite determiner can be followed by certain quantifiers (the many problems, these three things, my very few faults).
- The words all and both can be followed by a definite determiner (all the green apples, both the boys), which can also be followed by a quantifier as above (all the many outstanding issues).
- The word all can be followed by a cardinal number (all three things).
- The word some can be followed by a cardinal number (some eight packets, meaning "approximately eight").
- Words and phrases expressing fractions and multiples, such as half, double, twice, three times, etc. can be followed by a definite determiner: half a minute, double the risk, twice my age, three times my salary, three-quarters the diameter, etc.
- The words such and exclamative-what can be followed by an indefinite article (as mentioned in the section above).
- The word many can be used with the indefinite article and a singular noun (many a night, many an awkward moment).
- The words each and every can be followed by a cardinal number or other expression of definite quantity (each two seats, every five grams of flour).
...
As with other parts of speech, it is often possible to connect determiners of the same type with the conjunctions and and or: his and her children, two or three beans.
The same answer says that "I drove this my car" is wrong. The form "this" followed by a possessive is now rare, but was once more common, especially in formal writing. In particular sentences such as:
It is a mistake to regard aspects of this our present society as unchangeable rules.
were sufficiently common to be a style marker in the writings of the late Robert A Heinlein.
Since the question title asks about using "two possessives in a row", this can certainly be proper.
- This was John's father's watch.
- This was King Mark's wife's cousin's castle.
are both quite correct.
Our last week's meeting
is a little akward, but I for one do not think that it is incorrect.
The answer by Tanner Swett says "it's never acceptable for a noun phrase to have more than one determiner." However, the Wikipedia article lists eight different "common" cases where multiple determiners are acceptable. Specifically:
- A definite determiner can be followed by certain quantifiers (the many problems, these three things, my very few faults).
- The words all and both can be followed by a definite determiner (all the green apples, both the boys), which can also be followed by a quantifier as above (all the many outstanding issues).
- The word all can be followed by a cardinal number (all three things).
- The word some can be followed by a cardinal number (some eight packets, meaning "approximately eight").
- Words and phrases expressing fractions and multiples, such as half, double, twice, three times, etc. can be followed by a definite determiner: half a minute, double the risk, twice my age, three times my salary, three-quarters the diameter, etc.
- The words such and exclamative-what can be followed by an indefinite article (as mentioned in the section above).
- The word many can be used with the indefinite article and a singular noun (many a night, many an awkward moment).
- The words each and every can be followed by a cardinal number or other expression of definite quantity (each two seats, every five grams of flour).
...
As with other parts of speech, it is often possible to connect determiners of the same type with the conjunctions and and or: his and her children, two or three beans.
The same answer says that "I drove this my car" is wrong. The form "this" followed by a possessive is now rare, but was once more common, especially in formal writing. In particular sentences such as:
It is a mistake to regard aspects of this our present society as unchangeable rules.
were sufficiently common to be a style marker in the writings of the late Robert A Heinlein.
Since the question title asks about using "two possessives in a row", this can certainly be proper.
- This was John's father's watch.
- This was King Mark's wife's cousin's castle.
are both quite correct.
edited 4 hours ago
answered 5 hours ago
David SiegelDavid Siegel
7,167825
7,167825
1
Also this my will and this 29th of May 2019 - not common but not wrong. The Wikipedia article is just counting things as determiners that @TannerSwett is not counting, I think. I don't think it is really saying anything different. Anyway our last week's meeting does not come under any of the eight exceptions, as far as I can see, and to me it is so obviously wrong that it would take a lot more than a Wikipedia article to convince me otherwise.
– Minty
2 hours ago
@Minty then we must agree to differ. I would think "our today's meeting" so odd as to be wrong, but "our last week's meeting" unusual but acceptable, leaving aside the case of Indian English, where it seems to be the usual form.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
I can't imagine what logic would permit one of those constructions but not the other. Anyway I think the this... exceptions are more interesting. There must be some explanation but for now it escapes me. I don't think they come from e.g. this (my will, that is).
– Minty
2 hours ago
@Minty I don't think there is any true logic here, merely a pattern of usage. But then i think the attempt to find a fully logical rule in English grammar is often futile and wrongheaded. I agree that the constructions 'this"+possessive pronoun+noun or noun phrase are interesting, and i don't know their origin.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
add a comment |
1
Also this my will and this 29th of May 2019 - not common but not wrong. The Wikipedia article is just counting things as determiners that @TannerSwett is not counting, I think. I don't think it is really saying anything different. Anyway our last week's meeting does not come under any of the eight exceptions, as far as I can see, and to me it is so obviously wrong that it would take a lot more than a Wikipedia article to convince me otherwise.
– Minty
2 hours ago
@Minty then we must agree to differ. I would think "our today's meeting" so odd as to be wrong, but "our last week's meeting" unusual but acceptable, leaving aside the case of Indian English, where it seems to be the usual form.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
I can't imagine what logic would permit one of those constructions but not the other. Anyway I think the this... exceptions are more interesting. There must be some explanation but for now it escapes me. I don't think they come from e.g. this (my will, that is).
– Minty
2 hours ago
@Minty I don't think there is any true logic here, merely a pattern of usage. But then i think the attempt to find a fully logical rule in English grammar is often futile and wrongheaded. I agree that the constructions 'this"+possessive pronoun+noun or noun phrase are interesting, and i don't know their origin.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
1
1
Also this my will and this 29th of May 2019 - not common but not wrong. The Wikipedia article is just counting things as determiners that @TannerSwett is not counting, I think. I don't think it is really saying anything different. Anyway our last week's meeting does not come under any of the eight exceptions, as far as I can see, and to me it is so obviously wrong that it would take a lot more than a Wikipedia article to convince me otherwise.
– Minty
2 hours ago
Also this my will and this 29th of May 2019 - not common but not wrong. The Wikipedia article is just counting things as determiners that @TannerSwett is not counting, I think. I don't think it is really saying anything different. Anyway our last week's meeting does not come under any of the eight exceptions, as far as I can see, and to me it is so obviously wrong that it would take a lot more than a Wikipedia article to convince me otherwise.
– Minty
2 hours ago
@Minty then we must agree to differ. I would think "our today's meeting" so odd as to be wrong, but "our last week's meeting" unusual but acceptable, leaving aside the case of Indian English, where it seems to be the usual form.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
@Minty then we must agree to differ. I would think "our today's meeting" so odd as to be wrong, but "our last week's meeting" unusual but acceptable, leaving aside the case of Indian English, where it seems to be the usual form.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
I can't imagine what logic would permit one of those constructions but not the other. Anyway I think the this... exceptions are more interesting. There must be some explanation but for now it escapes me. I don't think they come from e.g. this (my will, that is).
– Minty
2 hours ago
I can't imagine what logic would permit one of those constructions but not the other. Anyway I think the this... exceptions are more interesting. There must be some explanation but for now it escapes me. I don't think they come from e.g. this (my will, that is).
– Minty
2 hours ago
@Minty I don't think there is any true logic here, merely a pattern of usage. But then i think the attempt to find a fully logical rule in English grammar is often futile and wrongheaded. I agree that the constructions 'this"+possessive pronoun+noun or noun phrase are interesting, and i don't know their origin.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
@Minty I don't think there is any true logic here, merely a pattern of usage. But then i think the attempt to find a fully logical rule in English grammar is often futile and wrongheaded. I agree that the constructions 'this"+possessive pronoun+noun or noun phrase are interesting, and i don't know their origin.
– David Siegel
2 hours ago
add a comment |
It's either:
Last week's meeting
or:
Our meeting last week
but I agree with your teacher that:
Our last week's meeting
sounds awkward and should probably be avoided.
add a comment |
It's either:
Last week's meeting
or:
Our meeting last week
but I agree with your teacher that:
Our last week's meeting
sounds awkward and should probably be avoided.
add a comment |
It's either:
Last week's meeting
or:
Our meeting last week
but I agree with your teacher that:
Our last week's meeting
sounds awkward and should probably be avoided.
It's either:
Last week's meeting
or:
Our meeting last week
but I agree with your teacher that:
Our last week's meeting
sounds awkward and should probably be avoided.
answered 6 hours ago
J.R.♦J.R.
101k8131251
101k8131251
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language Learners Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f212566%2fis-there-a-rule-that-prohibits-us-from-using-2-possessives-in-a-row%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown