MineralMan's Visual Guide to Commonly Misspelled Words: Issue 8

[MineralMan]

Today's issue is going to be a bit hard to illustrate, I know, but it's an important one. So, who's going to object if the illustrations I choose are somewhat lamer than usual. The homonyms for today are pretty confusing for many people, and for a simple reason. They seem to violate the standard rules of English. Except they don't really. The words for today are: Whose, Who's, and Whos. Since the last word is the easiest to illustrate, I'll start with it:

Whos

The plural of Who, as in Dr Seuss's Horton Hears a Who!:

Whos are the residents of Whoville, also the location of The Grinch Who Stole Christmas.



My favorite among the Whos is Cindy Lou Who:



Who's

There is only a single use for this spelling. It is an abbreviation for "Who is." Any other usage is incorrect. While it may seem as though it should also be used for the possessive of Who, that is not the case. There is no violation of the rules for the use of the apostrophe, since other pronouns also have a specific word for the possessive. For example, "your," as the possessive of "you," and "my" as the possessive of "me."




Whose

Whose is the possessive form of who. It is that simple. If you choose who's instead, people will wonder whose defective teaching methods led you astray. Whose is also sometimes used as a possessive for inanimate objects, animals, and concepts, when other structures might be awkward. While some object to that usage, as in "The play, whose cast is undistinguished, will probably close on opening night." Purists may object to that, but such constructions are widely used.

[checks-n-balances]

1. Theory: Rise of poor grammar is bringing about the Apocalypse

Thanks for doing your part to stave it off, MM!

[PoliticAverse]

2. Whose Who's Who was that? n/t

[MineralMan]

6. It is not mine. My concern with the inhabitants of the pages

of that book approaches zero. Whose Who's Who that is is completely irrelevant to me.

[HopeHoops]

3. I ain't never used none impropular englishes.

I is a teabagger?

[FormerDittoHead]

4. I could care less! n/t

:sarcasm: for those who look here!

[MineralMan]

5. No doubt you could.

Perhaps you meant "I couldn't care less." Only one of those is correct. But that is beyond my abilities to illustrate.

[FormerDittoHead]

10. Your grasp of grammar exceeds your ability to detect sarcasm.

If you check my *unedited* message above whose subject ended with "n/t", there's an "easter egg" waiting just for you!

[MineralMan]

13. Not at all. I was simply extending your most amusing post.

I believe you have misunderstood my intent. Sorry.

[pscot]

20. I take issue with your characterization

of "I could care less". Originally the phrase was, as you suggest, "I couldn't care less." It was British in origin. It was Americanized, probably by New York Jews, in a way that gives it an ironic or sarcastic spin. Sort of "I could care less" but I'd have to really work at it. It's use has been mildly controversial. Some people seem to be annoyed or offended by it. Americans in general don't seem do do irony. I admire your crusading spirit. This series of posts has been entertaining.

[MineralMan]

21. That's an interesting theory. Personally, I think it's used

because people don't really think about what they say. Perhaps the ironic sense is the reason some say "I could care less," but I think most simply don't understand the meaning of the phrase.

Now, my ex-mother-in-law had a different turn of that phrase. When in her cups (her normal state after lunch and beyond), she would say, "I could care so less." No irony was intended. She was just blotto.

[Bluenorthwest]

7. Who's On First?

http://www.abbottandcostello.net/who.htm
Because Vaudeville isn't dead, it just smells that way!

[Dept of Beer]

8. Well, at least you are posting something constructive today.

[MineralMan]

11. How nice of you to drop by my thread.

You needn't drop a turd in the punchbowl, though. We have a caterer to handle refreshments.

[Dept of Beer]

15. I was paying you a compliment!

[MineralMan]

16. I forgot you were left-handed.

My apologies.

[madinmaryland]

9. Who's on first. I don't know...

[PoliticAverse]

12. He's on third... n/t

[MineralMan]

14. But What's on second?

[DevonRex]

17. Hahaha. Link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfmvkO5x6Ng

[grasswire]

18. have you done its it's yet?

That seems to be a very common problem.

[MineralMan]

22. That one's coming up. Again, it will be difficult to illustrate in

a humorous way. But, you're right. The two are commonly confused. I even make that error from time to time when typing at my top speed. It's my habit to search for all instances of "it's" in my writing, and replace the incorrect ones. It's not a matter of not knowing, it's muscle memory banging out the wrong spelling. I use it's in my writing far more often than its. So, my hands just type it sometimes.

[grasswire]

24. yes, I see it misused regularly even by very educated peeps n/t

[lonestarnot]

19. When are you going to to gots, gotten, gotta?

Snort. :7

[MineralMan]

23. Hmm...shall we conjugate the past tense of to have?

I gots.
You gots.
We gots.
He, she, it gots.
They gotten.

I think that's correct, but I gotta look it up. Or is that I gotsta look it up?

[PoliticAverse]

28. You forgot gotted. n/t

[MineralMan]

29. So I did.

[socialist_n_TN]

25. Another one that gives me a little trouble

Well other than the "whos". That's one I know not to use. But "who's" and "whose" does sometime confuse me.

[tularetom]

26. Perhaps you can address the failure of many people to recognize that the word "media" is plural

"The media says a default would be bad for America"

"The media was unanimous in its approval of the raid that resulted in the death of Osama bin Laden".

No, it didn't. No, it wasn't.

They did. They were.

[MineralMan]

27. "Media" and "data" are lost causes.

Truly they are. That battle is lost forever. Part of the problem is in the way American English handles collective nouns. A good portion of the population could not even tell you the singular form of either. Datum and medium just aren't in the active vocabulary of most people. Medium is an adjective, as far as Americans are concerned.

Here, we write "General Motors is..." In England, they write "General Motors are..." The British are correct, but in American English, collective nouns like that are treated as singular. Media and data have been swept up in that usage, I'm afraid. Both have become considered to be collective nouns and are handled in the same way we handle General Motors. There is no going back.

It's one of the distinctive differences between British and American English usage. The time to correct the usage is long past.

[Liberal_in_LA]

30. great post