51

I know that its is the possessive and it's is the contraction, and know when to use them. But why doesn't the possessive have an apostrophe?

  • "The bear's eating a fish." [contraction]
  • "The bear's coat is brown." [possessive]
  • "It's eating a fish." [contraction]
  • "Its coat is brown." [possessive]
  • "One's eating a fish." [contraction]
  • "One's coat is brown." [possessive]

Wiktionary lists the etymology as "From it +‎ 's", and Online Etymology Dictionary says that this is actually the original form:

Originally written it's, and still deliberately spelled thus by some writers until early 1800s.

So what happened to the apostrophe? When did people stop using it, and why did they?

It seems that it's as the possessive is more natural, as most people do this until they're taught that it is wrong (or even after).

Update: Online Etymology Dictionary has been updated to include two potential explanations:

The apostrophe came to be omitted, perhaps because it's already was established as a contraction of it is, or by general habit of omitting apostrophes in personal pronouns (hers, yours, theirs, etc.).

Can anyone back up either of these arguments? The possessive one's still has the apostrophe, despite these.

endolith
  • 658
  • 2
  • 4
    @MrHen: the accepted answer to that question doesn't answer this one, in fact it contradicts the evidence presented here. – RegDwigнt Apr 25 '11 at 18:19
  • 1
    Also check here for a similar question. – boehj May 28 '11 at 05:51
  • 3
    I better point out as a Wiktionary contributor myself that it is just a wiki that anybody can edit much like here anybody can answer. We never have had any contributors who are trained in etymology or lexicography. We try our best but we don't claim to be authoritative. – hippietrail May 28 '11 at 07:58
  • 2
    +1 for giving sufficient background that my first guess at an explanation was rendered invalid before I finished reading the question. – Ryan Reich May 28 '11 at 12:46
  • I voted up "the bear his coat" before realizing it is wrong (and Stack Exchange won't let users change their votes), and the other answer is unconvincing because of "one's" and the fact that the other pronouns are older and not formed the same way. Any other answers? – endolith May 28 '11 at 14:59
  • 1
    Follow up question: why does its feel forced, but her's looks totally wrong? – Anthony Jun 12 '18 at 15:03
  • 1
    I'll note that, when I was a student in the 3rd or 4th grade back in the 50s, our teacher explained that it's was losing out to its, from the viewpoint of "authorities" of the era (Harvard, et al). So even then the issue wasn't settled. – Hot Licks Sep 22 '20 at 00:50
  • I think any answer to this question that does not begin with an elaboration on corporal punishment (and the effectiveness of unreasonable demands in establishing a dependents position) is in need of a thorough beating /s – vectory Nov 11 '21 at 21:09
  • I think it is annoying to us because in our heads "automatic mode", using any possessive noun causes us to automatically get that apostrophe ready to put before the "s". Then we do, mistakenly and have to try to discipline our minds to not do that which goes against the usual rule. For those of us who use both possessives and contractions, we falter more often than those who chose one or the other. The solution I came up with, but still struggle with is to just not use contractions at all, ban them, that way I can have an easier time "catching" myself. That does not always work. – osirisgothra Jan 20 '23 at 13:47

4 Answers4

31

Professor David Crystal explains it in his book The Fight for English: How language pundits ate, shot, and left (Crystal 2006), pp. 134-135:

Its is just as possessive as cat's, but it doesn't have an apostrophe. Why not? Because the printers and grammarians [of the nineteenth century - Alex B.] never thought the matter through [emphasis mine - Alex B.]. They applied their rule to nouns and forgot about pronouns, thus creating an exception (along with the food is hers, ours, yours, theirs) without realizing it. And even if they had noticed, they wouldn't have done anything about it, for it's was already taken, as it were, as the abbreviation of it is.

I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in languages. 

Charles Fries (Fries 1927) speculates that it could also be so because "their plural forms do not end in s" (cf. one - one's - ones or other - other's - others, ft. 7)

enter image description here

For an excellent summary of how the rules concerning apostrophe use developed, see

Sklar, E. (1976). The Possessive Apostrophe: The Development and Decline of a Crooked Mark. College English, 38(2), 175-183. doi:10.2307/376342

If you want to learn more about how the grammarians of the past arbitrarily imposed their confusing rules - and didn't stick to them - see pages 197-198 in Doctrine of correctness in English usage, 1700-1800 by S.A. Leonard (Leonard 1962); for instance, Joseph Priestly argued in The rudiments of English grammar, which was published in 1772, the following (pp. 86-87):

enter image description here enter image description here

On the other hand, in the same book, on page 11, he lists all the possessive pronouns without an apostrophe and he treats its separately, as the genitive form:

enter image description here

Thirteen years later, J. Mennye in An English grammar ; being a compilation from the works of such grammarians as have acquired the approbation of the public [...] argued diametrically the opposite of the convention earlier proposed by Joseph Priestly.

But in 1823, T.O. Churchill says the following in A New Grammar of the English Language:

enter image description here enter image description here

Alex B.
  • 4,210
  • What does 'their rule' refer to in the quote above? – Nathan Wailes Nov 25 '19 at 22:04
  • @xr280xr “the abbreviation of [noun] is” - what do you mean?? – Alex B. Nov 26 '19 at 03:38
  • 1
    @AlexB. I think I was saying the explanation that "... even if they had noticed, they wouldn't have done anything about it, for it's was already taken ... as the abbreviation of it is" doesn't make sense because any given noun + 's was also "already taken." I.e. They chose to allow cat's to mean both possessive of the cat and "cat is". So remaining consistent, it's should've been both too. – xr280xr Nov 27 '19 at 00:06
  • 1
    Even if they could have snuck past with your’s and their’s and her’s, I find that hi’s would look really confusing, plus whatever are they going to do with mine, thine, and ourn? :) – tchrist Sep 22 '20 at 00:38
  • @tchrist, apparently they'd shorten it to my (cp. Ger. mein) or drop the s (cp. Ger. possessed nominative meins "mine"), just as they shortened Proto-Germanic *mik to mi, me (cp. Ger. mich) besides nom *ik > I (it is beyond me why me is instead derived from the dative in wiktionary at least, so I might be wrong on all counts) – vectory Nov 11 '21 at 21:04
6

Here are some possessive pronouns:

  • My neighbour
  • Your friend
  • His wife
  • Her dog
  • Its tail

None of these have apostrophes. See Martin Beckett's answer for the rest.

Lunivore
  • 6,923
  • 8
  • 28
  • 47
  • 1
    That doesn't explain why "its" used to have an apostrophe and no longer does. "His" was "originally also the neut. possessive pronoun, but replaced in that sense c.1600 by its." http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=his – endolith Apr 25 '11 at 18:26
  • This is how I was taught to remember that its had no apostrophe, and I went to a fairly old-fashioned school. If others were also taught this pattern, that would provide one explanation. It's mostly a guess, though. Hope it's of interest at least. – Lunivore Apr 25 '11 at 18:31
  • 1
    I agree with this. If you consult Fowler's Modern English Usage you'll see that the pronoun "it" is included with all other pronouns and not given a possessive apostrophe (see page 303) http://books.google.com/books?id=Vr7muDFR6j4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=fowler+modern+english+usage&hl=en&ei=BsO1TdyfK4PUtQOyyvX5Cw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAA – MaQleod Apr 25 '11 at 18:53
  • 5
    I don't buy this argument. Where would you even put an apostrophe in her? The possessive adjectives in modern English are my, your, his, her, its, our, their and whose. But its is the only one in the list constructed by combining the pronoun with 's. If it was removed purely for consistency like this, it would seem to be a case of hypercorrection. – endolith Apr 25 '11 at 21:15
  • 5
    Ah, there is one other possessive produced by combining a pronoun with 's: one's still keeps the apostrophe. – endolith Apr 26 '11 at 01:55
  • 3
    I agree with @endolith. My, your, and his are all separate words to me, you, and him. If those first three didn't exist, you'd expect to see me's, you's, and him's instead. Its is directly from 'it' + a possessive s, so there's no valid comparison with the other possessive pronouns. – Cam Jackson Dec 14 '11 at 22:45
  • Those are not possessive pronouns — those are possessive *adjectives! The possessive pronouns*** are mine, thine, his, hers, its, ours, yours, and theirs. The possessive *adjectives* (also and arguably more accurately called possessive *determiners) are my, thy, his, her, its, our, your,* and their. See the difference? The first set are substantives like nouns; the second set are determiners like articles. Utterly unlike in function, despite similarity in spelling. – tchrist May 22 '12 at 21:45
  • 2
    @tchrist, A quote for you from Huddleston and Pullum 2002: "The dependent and independent genitives are often analysed in traditional grammar as 'possessive adjectives' and 'possessive pronouns' respectively, but we find this an unsatisfactory way of handling the difference between the two sets of forms" (p. 471). See HP2002: 471 for reasons why that traditional distinction doesn't withstand scrutiny. – Alex B. May 22 '12 at 22:50
  • @AlexB. Don’t have your reference. Tell me why conflating substantives and determiners is useful. – tchrist May 22 '12 at 23:04
  • @tchrist, I've never said that "conflating substantives and determiners" is useful/preferable. Obviously, what some call "possessive adjectives" is not the only type of "determiners". But yes, I can post a summary here bit later. – Alex B. May 22 '12 at 23:19
  • 1
    Here are some examples that suggest that "my" and the like don't behave like adjectives: both "my" and "mine" can be replaced by genitive NPs (my father=>Kim's father, no article! but "a loving father"); coordination (He did it without my or the doctor's approval); "my" as a subject of gerund-participial clauses (No one objected to my joining the party); modification ("my loving father") etc. – Alex B. May 23 '12 at 01:21
  • @tchrist, If you need a more detailed answer, feel free to ask this question on Linguistics SE. I'm there, too. – Alex B. May 23 '12 at 01:30
  • @tchrist, most importantly, possessive pronouns can be anaphoric (refer to a previously mentioned referent), e.g. John likes his car. – Alex B. May 23 '12 at 01:39
  • 1
    @AlexB. I see a big difference between Jon likes her, John likes her car, and Jon likes hers. I bet she does, too. – tchrist May 23 '12 at 02:07
  • 1
    @tchrist, once again, I never said there is no difference between "my" and "mine". All I said is that words like "my" are possessive pronouns (see my comments above), and not adjectives, as you argued. – Alex B. May 23 '12 at 02:49
  • @AlexB. I meant to write possessive determiner in the part about arguably better called — notice it’s inappropriately doubled, indicating the brain fart — and to explain that some folks called them possessive adjectives. But they are no more plain old adjectives than articles are. The determiner slot is a very specific one in the ordering of a noun phrase. – tchrist May 23 '12 at 03:29
1

I was told that the possessive apostrophe was originally a contraction.

"The bear's coat" was originally "the bear his coat" and the apostrophe appeared as the his was gradually shortened — so it would make sense that it is had an apostrophe but its didn't.

RegDwigнt
  • 97,231
mgb
  • 24,191
  • 1
    That's cool. Kind of like how "then" became "than". "The bear is bigger, then the bee" → "The bear is bigger than the bee". http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=than – endolith Apr 25 '11 at 18:06
  • 18
    'The 18th century explanation that the apostrophe might replace a genitive pronoun, as in "the king’s horse" being a shortened form of "the king, his horse", is doubtful. This "his genitive" appears in English only for a relatively brief time, and was never the most common form.' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genitive_case http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/His_genitive – endolith Apr 25 '11 at 18:23
  • 7
    I had heard that it was originally "the beares coat" and the e was replaced with an apostrophe. the '-es' ending being the Old English declension representing the possessive form for masculine and neuter nouns. – Chris Cudmore Feb 24 '12 at 14:45
1

I read through this thread and found that you really do not have an answer. The etymology of all these words, adjectives and pronouns alike, is confusing, to say the least. Additionally, it seems that there are conflicting reasons for everything. Some say that there used to be apostrophes with certain adjectives/pronouns, and some say they never existed. But let me try to help to make this simple. First and foremost, we need to recognize the different categories we have here. We have possessive adjectives and possessive pronouns. For example, hers is a possessive pronoun, while *her" is a possessive adjective, in our current context at least. Its can technically fall within each, even though we most commonly hear/see it as being the adjective. Moving on--

So, lets look at the personal pronoun we. In no way, shape, or form would we say we's, and if you know anything about etymology, you know that "we's" or "we" does not and cannot turn into "our" or "ours". This proves that our, along with other possessive adjectives are their own words. Now, let's move to those, for a second, to further my point. It would be easy to just say "the apostrophe was omitted" in cases like "our" to "ours" and so forth, but what about the other cases in which the words are more etymologically different; "mine" to "my", "who's" to "whose"? Exactly, they are just different words. Throughout the English language, we have many words that sound and look the same, and they might even be derivative of eachother. However, in English's current state, they are their own entity-- they are their own word, a different word. If you take a step back and think about things loosely, you will see that the same applies to "its". While it does seem weird when you try to think of it as you do, "its" really is just its own word.

That's my take. Take it or leave it.

AJK432
  • 420
  • It would be nice if you could cite your source that know "anything about etymology". I don't remember the facts, but find it theoretically possible to construct our from we's via syllabification and rhotacism. What do you think where the r came from? The derivation from us that would be the only alternative that I can imagine would be nearly the same, technicly indistinct, and actually very difficult to judge from modern English alone (which is the majority of your audience) – vectory Nov 11 '21 at 21:27