0

Is the following sentence, which uses possessive pronoun "its" without noun, correct?

Affirming something's being white excludes denying it, because something's being white excludes its not being white.

This book, for example, uses the noun "material truth" after "its"

Denying an idea is having another idea that excludes its material truth.

It would more helpful if anyone interpret with apt examples.

EDIT: The word "plural" has been changed "possessive". Apology for my mistake.

1
  • Fighting the urge to quote Heinlein... Could you explain what you mean by 'without noun'? In the first sentence the noun is 'Something' in the second it's 'idea' – PerryW Jun 15 '16 at 6:13
1

No, I do not believe that the word it can be plural.

In the two examples you provide, its is the possessive form of it. There is another word, it's. "It's" is a contraction of "it" and "is".

So in the firs example, (not being white) is acting as a noun and it belongs to it:

something's being white excludes the possibility of it (the thing) not being white

In the second example, the (material truth) belongs to it:

material truth of it (that original idea)

11
  • The word "plural" has been changed "possessive". Apology for my mistake. – ARYF Jun 15 '16 at 6:06
  • My answer still stands. I can provide more examples if you request. – Em. Jun 15 '16 at 6:07
  • please, I need the answer for "possessive" not for "plural". – ARYF Jun 15 '16 at 6:10
  • 1
    It would be more helpful if you modify the answer completely according to the question. – ARYF Jun 15 '16 at 6:18
  • 3
    I think it's preferable to see "not being white" is a gerund-participial clause, rather than as an expression 'acting as a noun'. – BillJ Jun 15 '16 at 9:54

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.