0

enter image description here

hello, I know that we cannot use "of" with names, my book says " Tina's cat" is correct but "the cat of Tina" is not correct.

but what about the screenshot?

"the army of John Sena"

or

"the ballad of Paul McCartney "

  • 1
    I think the "army of John Cenas" has "John Cena" in the plural. It's an army, of many copies of John Cena. – SamBC Feb 11 at 21:09
  • If your book says that the cat of Tina is ungrammatical, you should throw it out and get another book. It's not a construction that's commonly used, but it's perfectly correct—and used in formal writing. – Jason Bassford Feb 12 at 22:58
2

Saying something such as "the cat of Tina" would be grammatically correct. However, this phrasing is relatively rarely used in conversational English. This is because "the cat of Tina" is considered more formal than "Tina's cat".

Sometimes this more formal phrasing is used to create emphasis. For example, "The ballad of Paul McCartney" puts more emphasis on the fact that it is a ballad than the fact that it belongs to Paul McCartney. Similarly, "the army of John Cenas" puts emphasis on the fact that it is an army.

0

Like @SamBC pointed out in the comment, this is not "the army of John Cena", as in an army belonging to John Cena. Rather, it is an army made up of John Cena clones. So this is not an instance where "of" indicates possession.

As for "The Ballad of John and Yoko" (Paul McCartney is not the right Beatle), this is an idiomatic kind of title - "The Ballad of X" means something like "The Tale [Story] of X", as in, a saga about a person (or people), that may be in verse (a ballad is a type of song or poem).

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.