Plan B Forum

-"BB"-

DUHHH ... It's a cowch, of course.

-"BB"-

Then this must be a Ham-mock...

or an Adirazorback?

Bicycle Bill wrote: ↑

Wed Aug 26, 2020 3:28 am

DUHHH ... It's a cowch, of course.

-"BB"-

Even after $400 off it's $1399. I'd say they're milking it for more than it's worth.

(Hmm. Note to Meade. I don't think I have ever written that phrase before. Should it be 'its' or 'it's?' Google is divided on the subject.)

The proper use of its is tricky sometimes because It's not always intuitive which can make its usage incorrect. Easiest way to figure out the proper usage: if you can spell out it is, then it's is right. If it makes no sense to spell out it is, then its is likely the proper possessive.

I'd say they're milking it for more than it's worth.

Is correct either way, though the meaning is slightly different.

Yeah, what he wrote. But also there's the case of "it has" rather than "it is".

It's got no application to this problem. It's fun, isn't it?

Thanks guys but I am well aware of the difference between it's and its. It's kind of the point of my comment. (Although of course the Constitution, which seems to govern everything over here, uses it's with an apostrophe as the possessive pronoun. My guess is that in formal writing of the period, contractions such as don't or shan't or won't or it's for it is, were not used. They used do not or shall not or will not or it is in a written document. Hence no need for the distinction and it's with an apostrophe was perfectly well understood and in accord with the more general use of the apostrophe as indicating a possessive.

Down with that pun.