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;








1















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?










share|improve this question






























    1















    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?










    share|improve this question


























      1












      1








      1








      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?










      share|improve this question
















      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






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 6 hours ago









      Jasper

      20.8k44176




      20.8k44176










      asked 9 hours ago









      hey_youhey_you

      1162




      1162




















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          5














          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.





          share|improve this answer























          • 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


















          3















          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.






          share|improve this answer




















          • 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


















          0














          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.






          share|improve this answer























            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
            );



            );













            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            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









            5














            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.





            share|improve this answer























            • 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















            5














            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.





            share|improve this answer























            • 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













            5












            5








            5







            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.





            share|improve this answer













            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.






            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            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

















            • 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













            3















            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.






            share|improve this answer




















            • 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















            3















            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.






            share|improve this answer




















            • 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













            3












            3








            3








            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.






            share|improve this answer
















            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.







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            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












            • 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











            0














            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.






            share|improve this answer



























              0














              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.






              share|improve this answer

























                0












                0








                0







                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.






                share|improve this answer













                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.







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered 6 hours ago









                J.R.J.R.

                101k8131251




                101k8131251



























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded
















































                    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.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    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





















































                    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







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    19. јануар Садржај Догађаји Рођења Смрти Празници и дани сећања Види још Референце Мени за навигацијуу

                    Israel Cuprins Etimologie | Istorie | Geografie | Politică | Demografie | Educație | Economie | Cultură | Note explicative | Note bibliografice | Bibliografie | Legături externe | Meniu de navigaresite web oficialfacebooktweeterGoogle+Instagramcanal YouTubeInstagramtextmodificaremodificarewww.technion.ac.ilnew.huji.ac.ilwww.weizmann.ac.ilwww1.biu.ac.ilenglish.tau.ac.ilwww.haifa.ac.ilin.bgu.ac.ilwww.openu.ac.ilwww.ariel.ac.ilCIA FactbookHarta Israelului"Negotiating Jerusalem," Palestine–Israel JournalThe Schizoid Nature of Modern Hebrew: A Slavic Language in Search of a Semitic Past„Arabic in Israel: an official language and a cultural bridge”„Latest Population Statistics for Israel”„Israel Population”„Tables”„Report for Selected Countries and Subjects”Human Development Report 2016: Human Development for Everyone„Distribution of family income - Gini index”The World FactbookJerusalem Law„Israel”„Israel”„Zionist Leaders: David Ben-Gurion 1886–1973”„The status of Jerusalem”„Analysis: Kadima's big plans”„Israel's Hard-Learned Lessons”„The Legacy of Undefined Borders, Tel Aviv Notes No. 40, 5 iunie 2002”„Israel Journal: A Land Without Borders”„Population”„Israel closes decade with population of 7.5 million”Time Series-DataBank„Selected Statistics on Jerusalem Day 2007 (Hebrew)”Golan belongs to Syria, Druze protestGlobal Survey 2006: Middle East Progress Amid Global Gains in FreedomWHO: Life expectancy in Israel among highest in the worldInternational Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook Database, April 2011: Nominal GDP list of countries. Data for the year 2010.„Israel's accession to the OECD”Popular Opinion„On the Move”Hosea 12:5„Walking the Bible Timeline”„Palestine: History”„Return to Zion”An invention called 'the Jewish people' – Haaretz – Israel NewsoriginalJewish and Non-Jewish Population of Palestine-Israel (1517–2004)ImmigrationJewishvirtuallibrary.orgChapter One: The Heralders of Zionism„The birth of modern Israel: A scrap of paper that changed history”„League of Nations: The Mandate for Palestine, 24 iulie 1922”The Population of Palestine Prior to 1948originalBackground Paper No. 47 (ST/DPI/SER.A/47)History: Foreign DominationTwo Hundred and Seventh Plenary Meeting„Israel (Labor Zionism)”Population, by Religion and Population GroupThe Suez CrisisAdolf EichmannJustice Ministry Reply to Amnesty International Report„The Interregnum”Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs – The Palestinian National Covenant- July 1968Research on terrorism: trends, achievements & failuresThe Routledge Atlas of the Arab–Israeli conflict: The Complete History of the Struggle and the Efforts to Resolve It"George Habash, Palestinian Terrorism Tactician, Dies at 82."„1973: Arab states attack Israeli forces”Agranat Commission„Has Israel Annexed East Jerusalem?”original„After 4 Years, Intifada Still Smolders”From the End of the Cold War to 2001originalThe Oslo Accords, 1993Israel-PLO Recognition – Exchange of Letters between PM Rabin and Chairman Arafat – Sept 9- 1993Foundation for Middle East PeaceSources of Population Growth: Total Israeli Population and Settler Population, 1991–2003original„Israel marks Rabin assassination”The Wye River Memorandumoriginal„West Bank barrier route disputed, Israeli missile kills 2”"Permanent Ceasefire to Be Based on Creation Of Buffer Zone Free of Armed Personnel Other than UN, Lebanese Forces"„Hezbollah kills 8 soldiers, kidnaps two in offensive on northern border”„Olmert confirms peace talks with Syria”„Battleground Gaza: Israeli ground forces invade the strip”„IDF begins Gaza troop withdrawal, hours after ending 3-week offensive”„THE LAND: Geography and Climate”„Area of districts, sub-districts, natural regions and lakes”„Israel - Geography”„Makhteshim Country”Israel and the Palestinian Territories„Makhtesh Ramon”„The Living Dead Sea”„Temperatures reach record high in Pakistan”„Climate Extremes In Israel”Israel in figures„Deuteronom”„JNF: 240 million trees planted since 1901”„Vegetation of Israel and Neighboring Countries”Environmental Law in Israel„Executive branch”„Israel's election process explained”„The Electoral System in Israel”„Constitution for Israel”„All 120 incoming Knesset members”„Statul ISRAEL”„The Judiciary: The Court System”„Israel's high court unique in region”„Israel and the International Criminal Court: A Legal Battlefield”„Localities and population, by population group, district, sub-district and natural region”„Israel: Districts, Major Cities, Urban Localities & Metropolitan Areas”„Israel-Egypt Relations: Background & Overview of Peace Treaty”„Solana to Haaretz: New Rules of War Needed for Age of Terror”„Israel's Announcement Regarding Settlements”„United Nations Security Council Resolution 497”„Security Council resolution 478 (1980) on the status of Jerusalem”„Arabs will ask U.N. to seek razing of Israeli wall”„Olmert: Willing to trade land for peace”„Mapping Peace between Syria and Israel”„Egypt: Israel must accept the land-for-peace formula”„Israel: Age structure from 2005 to 2015”„Global, regional, and national disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for 306 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE) for 188 countries, 1990–2013: quantifying the epidemiological transition”10.1016/S0140-6736(15)61340-X„World Health Statistics 2014”„Life expectancy for Israeli men world's 4th highest”„Family Structure and Well-Being Across Israel's Diverse Population”„Fertility among Jewish and Muslim Women in Israel, by Level of Religiosity, 1979-2009”„Israel leaders in birth rate, but poverty major challenge”„Ethnic Groups”„Israel's population: Over 8.5 million”„Israel - Ethnic groups”„Jews, by country of origin and age”„Minority Communities in Israel: Background & Overview”„Israel”„Language in Israel”„Selected Data from the 2011 Social Survey on Mastery of the Hebrew Language and Usage of Languages”„Religions”„5 facts about Israeli Druze, a unique religious and ethnic group”„Israël”Israel Country Study Guide„Haredi city in Negev – blessing or curse?”„New town Harish harbors hopes of being more than another Pleasantville”„List of localities, in alphabetical order”„Muncitorii români, doriți în Israel”„Prietenia româno-israeliană la nevoie se cunoaște”„The Higher Education System in Israel”„Middle East”„Academic Ranking of World Universities 2016”„Israel”„Israel”„Jewish Nobel Prize Winners”„All Nobel Prizes in Literature”„All Nobel Peace Prizes”„All Prizes in Economic Sciences”„All Nobel Prizes in Chemistry”„List of Fields Medallists”„Sakharov Prize”„Țara care și-a sfidat "destinul" și se bate umăr la umăr cu Silicon Valley”„Apple's R&D center in Israel grew to about 800 employees”„Tim Cook: Apple's Herzliya R&D center second-largest in world”„Lecții de economie de la Israel”„Land use”Israel Investment and Business GuideA Country Study: IsraelCentral Bureau of StatisticsFlorin Diaconu, „Kadima: Flexibilitate și pragmatism, dar nici un compromis în chestiuni vitale", în Revista Institutului Diplomatic Român, anul I, numărul I, semestrul I, 2006, pp. 71-72Florin Diaconu, „Likud: Dreapta israeliană constant opusă retrocedării teritoriilor cureite prin luptă în 1967", în Revista Institutului Diplomatic Român, anul I, numărul I, semestrul I, 2006, pp. 73-74MassadaIsraelul a crescut in 50 de ani cât alte state intr-un mileniuIsrael Government PortalIsraelIsraelIsraelmmmmmXX451232cb118646298(data)4027808-634110000 0004 0372 0767n7900328503691455-bb46-37e3-91d2-cb064a35ffcc1003570400564274ge1294033523775214929302638955X146498911146498911

                    Кастелфранко ди Сопра Становништво Референце Спољашње везе Мени за навигацију43°37′18″ СГШ; 11°33′32″ ИГД / 43.62156° СГШ; 11.55885° ИГД / 43.62156; 11.5588543°37′18″ СГШ; 11°33′32″ ИГД / 43.62156° СГШ; 11.55885° ИГД / 43.62156; 11.558853179688„The GeoNames geographical database”„Istituto Nazionale di Statistica”проширитиууWorldCat156923403n850174324558639-1cb14643287r(подаци)