Nouns and Pronouns

Let's start with possessive pronouns.

Possessive pronouns generally do not take an apostrophe.

* "ITS" = "belonging to it," a possessive pronoun

* "IT'S" = "it is," a contraction of a pronoun (it) and a verb (is)

Not sure which you want? Read the sentence aloud substituting "it is" where you see "its" or "it's." You'll be able to tell immediately if its meaning is clear or if it's not.

* "WHOSE" = "belonging to whom"

* "WHO'S = "who is"

* "YOUR" = "belonging to you"

* "YOU'RE" = "you are"

But of course there are exceptions.

* The possessive pronoun "one's," belonging to one, and its (!) related pronouns, such as "everyone's" and "someone's."

Remember: One is the one.

* The possessive pronouns ending in "body's," such as "everybody's" and "somebody's."

Probably the biggest problem with pronouns involves agreement.

A pronoun needs to agree with its antecedent (the word it refers to in the sentence) in person (first, second or third), gender (male, female or neuter) and number (singular or plural).

Here are the two steps for identifying agreement issues:

1) Identify the antecedent. Usually, it's the subject of the clause. It can be a noun or another pronoun.

2) Figure out whether that antecedent is in first, second or third person

...whether it's singular or plural

...and whether it's male, female or neuter.

Again, the pronoun must refer to its antecedent in person, number and gender.

* Person: first (I, we), second (you, yours) or third (he, she, it, one, they)

* Number: singular (I, you, he, she, it) or plural (we, you, they)

* Gender: masculine (he), feminine (she) or neuter (everything else)

Most English pronouns are neuter in gender. The exceptions are primarily in the third-person singular.

For instance, in the sentence above -- "The pronoun must refer to its antecedent" -- the word "its" agrees in person (third), number (singular) and gender (neuter) with the antecedent, "pronoun."

If the subject were changed to "Pronouns," then "its" would need to be changed to "their": "Pronouns must refer to their antecedents." The person and gender would be the same, but the plural form of the antecedent would require a plural pronoun. (And, in this example, it would be best to make the object, "antecedents" plural, too, for consistency and clarity.)

Here are a couple of additional examples:

* A student must budget his or her time.

Note: This is grammatically correct and it's non-sexist ... but it's also cumbersome. Most editors would change it to: "Students must budget their time.")

* Neither Anne nor the other children had finished their homework in time to watch the news.

Note: In this example, the use of the correlative conjunction "neither/nor" dictates that the pronoun agree with the word after "nor."

Another thing that causes trouble is distinguishing between who and whom (and whoever and whomever).

"Who" and "whoever" are actors. They stand in for subjects of a sentence or clause.

"Whom" and "whomever" receive action. They stand in for objects of a sentence or clause.

Here's a good tip: Start reading the sentence immediately after the point at which you have a choice between "who" and "whom."

* If "he" ("she," "they") works, use "who" or "whoever."

* If "him" ("her," "them") works, use "whom" or "whomever."

Give it a try:

It's a mistake to give your credit card to who/whom/whoever/whomever asks for it over the phone.

No one recalls who/whom/whoever/whomever she said should work tonight.

The attorney asked the store owner to describe who/whom/whoever/whomever she saw running away.

Who (etc.), that and which are relative pronouns.

Relative pronouns introduce a dependent clause that is closely connected with the pronoun's antecedent.

Choosing the right one depends on three things:

* The pronoun's case (nominative or objective).

We were just here. The choice is between "who" and "whom." Is the pronoun serving as the subject (nominative, "who") or the object (objective, "whom")?

* The pronoun's antecedent.

The issue here is the choice between "who" (and pronouns like it) and "that" (or "which").

Use the appropriate "who" word if the antecedent is a person or an animal with a name, such as a pet.

Use either "that" or "which" if the antecedent is a thing, idea or collective noun -- in general, if the antecedent is not a person or an animal with a name.

* The pronoun's restrictiveness, meaning whether it introduces a clause that is essential or not.

Use "that" with essential clauses. Remember that you do not need commas.

Use "which" with non-essential clauses, which require commas.

Of course, if the clause refers to a person, you would use the correct form of "who." The punctuation rules hold: commas with non-essential clauses.

Example: "The professor who wrote the book is an idiot."

Kinder, gentler example: "My editing professor, who was eager to get to the part of the course that involved headline writing, struggled to explain grammar."

Give it a try:

* The official who/whom/that/which the prime minister said had leaked the information who/whom/that/which led to the embarrassing disclosure was asked to resign.

* He reportedly had discussed the matter in the local pub with pronoun would listen.

* Pronoun will be appointed to replace him?

Pronoun will the prime minister appoint to replace him?

Changing stride completely...

* The bear who/whom/that/which wanted our lunch was quite welcome to it.

* The only bear I want to meet in the woods is Smokey the Bear who/whom/that/which looks friendly in his cute hat.

Here are few other miscellaneous things that sometimes trip people up:

* There are about a gazillion exceptions to the basic rule about forming the plural of a noun (add s) and the possessive of a noun (add 's.) My best advice is to know where to find the guidelines in WWW: pages 33 - 35.

* Collective nouns (single words that describe a group) usually are considered singular ... but not always.

* Collective nouns are considered singular when the group is acting together or in agreement. This is the most common usage.

Examples: The press has been critical in its reporting of the war in Iraq.

The Senate votes Wednesday on the spending bill.

* Collective nouns are considered plural when members of the group either or acting as individuals or disagree with one another.

Example: The jury were unable to reach a verdict.

This sounds yucky. An easy way to deal with such constructions is to add a word such as "members" or, better, a plural noun that means the same thing:

Jury members were unable to reach a verdict.
The jurors were unable to reach a verdict.

As long as we're on subject-verb agreement, here are a few other little gems:

* Plural nouns ending in "a" (media, data, criteria) are, well, plural. They take a plural verb.

Examples: The media are powerful.
The data are conclusive.

(The singular forms of these nouns are "medium," "datum" and "criterion." "Mediums" is incorrect unless you are talking about people who summon ghosts and gaze into crystal balls.)

* None is usually singular, meaning "no one."

It is plural if "none" is used to mean "no two," generally in the sense of people disagreeing.

Examples: None of these rules makes sense. (Not one of these rules makes sense.)

None of the roommates agree about the ideal pizza topping.
(No two roommates agree. Each roommate disagrees with the others.)

* Intervening words that come between the subject and the verb -- whether or not they are set off by punctuation marks such as dashes, commas or parentheses -- generally do not affect the number of the subject.

(There are a few exceptions to this rule -- see page 52 of WWW -- but the exceptions are so convoluted that you might as well not even worry about them.)

Example: The grammar book, as well as all the other textbooks in my backpack, weighs me down.

Everyone except my two sisters thinks it's time to go.