Sorry, but I just can't take it anymore.
Actually, I can't take "it's" anymore.
I've had enough and I must interrupt this blog with what amounts to a public service announcement for English-speaking peoples the wide world over.
Evidently, despite the sterling public and private school education provided by our fair nation, there are people -- evil, ignorant, or merely misinformed, it's not for me to say -- who insist on using it's, the possessive form of the pronoun it, when the correct form is its.
Misuse of a possessive pronoun -- threat or menace? Personally, I think that if we continue to allow people to keep using "it's" for "its," we're letting the terrorists win.
This menace must be stopped.
In preparation for setting us all straight, I referred to the Bible of English grammar, William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White's The Elements of Style, in its super-attractive new edition (Penguin Press) with the quirkily beautiful illustrations by Maira Kalman. To my amazement, the rule governing proper possessive use of the word it isn't buried somewhere within.
It's the first rule on the first page of the book.
Yes, that's right. For the past 50 years, the key to understanding this elementary rule has been hiding in plain sight on the very first page of the most widely-read guide to grammar in the modern world. I quote herewith:
The pronominal possessives hers, its, theirs, yours, and ours have no apostrophe. Indefinite pronouns, however, use the apostrophe to show possession.
one's rights
somebody else's umbrella
A common error is to write it's for its, or vice versa. The first is a contraction, meaning "it is." The second is a possessive.
It's a wise dog that scratches its own fleas.
See how clear, how simple? When the rule is broken, one finds such abominations as this in print:
The kumquat had lost it's flavor.
Thus a gorgeous word -- speak kumquat, with its mellifluous, delectable, vaguely obscene confluence of hard k and soft qua and its seductive brilliance cannot be denied -- is bludgeoned in its tracks, the sentence containing it rendered inert and inane. Isn't it a shame?
If you've ever gotten the its/it's thing wrong, know that you have illustrious company. Just this weekend I read a screenplay written by a seemingly sharp, smart Saturday Night Live writer, and he got it's wrong; some years back I read a script by a certain Pulitzer Prize-winning playwright, and she got it's wrong. So clearly this pernicious, viral horror of a linguistic abuse can strike anyone at any time.
So. Strunk and White didn't see fit to elaborate, but let me provide those of you who may be confused about this usage, with a handy way to always get it right.
If you have used "it's" in a sentence and you're not absolutely sure it has been spelled properly... undo the contraction. Take it apart. Rewrite the sentence using "it is" instead of "it's." Thus:
The kumquat had lost it is flavor.
Poetic, perhaps, in an autistic sort of way, but what means this? The kumquat had lost... something, and meanwhile, this new abstract thought has been abruptly jump cut into the sentence: it is flavor.
Easy, right? I guarantee that if you use this simple foolproof method of vetting every it's for even a week or two, there will be no going back to the Dark Ages of poor grammar, and you will be cured.
You're welcome. It's the least I can do. It's for a good cause. The proper use of it's, I believe, is the bar, the holding line that keeps all of us from sliding down that slippery slope into a world of grunting, yelping abject miscommunication.
A final thought for those of you screenwriters out there who may be rolling your eyes, thinking who gives a fuck? Well, I do -- and by this I mean me, the eleven other story analysts currently employed at Universal, the some hundred or so other union analysts working at all the studios, and an additional thousand or two working freelance readers in Los Angeles. The majority of us, when we come across a line in a screenplay suffering from It'sitis (e.g. He picked the gun up by it's barrel), think to ourselves: idiot.
Is that what you want, when you go out with your latest hot spec script? Didn't think so.
It's a wise writer who makes sure his or her prose is appreciated for its virtues, and not derided for its inadequacies. I'm just sayin'.
Of course no sooner have I launched this salvo against all that's unholy in the world of words, than another serpent rears its hideous head. There's already a new and heinous linguistic offense out there, someday liable to propel me to the top of the Citywalk marquees with an Uzi. I've been reading a number of screenplays where the mistakes are her's...
Hear hear! Nine out of ten scripts have this problem. The one with no its/it's blemish immediately stands out as a well-written affair as it seems to be indicative of someone who can actually write.
Posted by: Danny | October 16, 2006 at 01:31 AM
Oh, Billy. You knew I couldn't take it (it's) anymore. A blessing on your head. You're in my will.
Thank you.
Posted by: binnie | October 16, 2006 at 05:24 AM
Wow, thanks Billy. With my own its/it's issues I probebly headed down the same path John Walker took as he sided with Taliban before America invaded Afganistan. But now you've set me straight... Well, straighter. Its a miracle! Now if you could only help me with the other 101 English useage issues that beset me...
Changing the English useage of one ignorant dolt at a time -- the modern day, screenwriting equivalent of Mother Teressa, keep up the good work, Billy!
- E.C. Henry from Bonney Lake, WA
Posted by: E.C. Henry | October 16, 2006 at 05:24 AM
Um...can you tackle spelling next, Billy?
Posted by: HuckleCat | October 16, 2006 at 08:54 AM
Ooooh, HuckleCat, you're in the will, too.
Posted by: binnie | October 16, 2006 at 09:00 AM
Hehehe... nice rant there, Mr. Billy.
It's amazing how many IQ points I delete (in my head) due to poor grammar and simple misspellings. And... it's automatic, I like you think "dolt!" before I can even blink and wahs my eyes if the offensive passage. (I ain't even a editor!)
Know what eles I get irked at? "Dreamed", and "spelled", dammnit people, it's "dreamt" and "spelt"!!! Look it up! Past tense and past participle!
Also, people are always saying "seen" when they mean "saw". GAHHH!!!
Now that my mini rant is over, I have to say that I don't often make the "it's" and "its" mistake but was called on the carpet for it in my last script. (Once.) I'll hang my head in shame now...
Sigh.
Posted by: Writergurl | October 16, 2006 at 09:05 AM
Gawd, I (seemingly) can rant but can't use puntcutation correctly. (Should be... I, like you, ) Lawd.
SIGH...
Posted by: Writergurl | October 16, 2006 at 09:08 AM
No, dreamed and spelled are both correct. Dreamt is fine as a past participle; spelt is mostly the British use of the past participle (and I think it's a cereal grain...?).
As you can probably tell from my participation on this particular post, for me, SPELLING COUNTS. A suggestion to blog responders: Before you post your response, run it through your e-mail program first (as if you were sending an e-mail), or your Word program, or whatever, then run that through its (not it's) spellcheck feature. Then copy and paste your perfectly spelled response into the "comments" box on Billy's blog. We'll all be so happy for it...
Posted by: binnie | October 16, 2006 at 09:35 AM
"Puntcutation", now that's an adorable word, Writergurl! Would cutating the punt be the maritime version of pimping the ride? LOL. Sorry. Couldn't resist.
I still have issues with lie/lay. You'd think I wouldn't, given what I write. But, thanks to Billy, its/it's is engraved on the brain.
Posted by: Ann Wesley Hardin | October 16, 2006 at 09:35 AM
"cutating the punt"
Ann, I'm so glad you're not dyslexic!
(Just continuing the Ann and Binnie Show for Billy's amusement)
Posted by: binnie | October 16, 2006 at 10:16 AM
See? I done tole y'all, I ain't got no bidness wid dis rightin...
;)
p.s. I KNOW "dreamed" and spelled" are "technically correct" but if you're talking style, I'll always stick with "dreamt" and "spelt". they sound better to my ear, as well as also being "correct".
So there!
:)
Posted by: Writergurl | October 16, 2006 at 11:46 AM
Okay, I must vote for your next rant: Toward vs. Towards.
Posted by: MaryAn | October 16, 2006 at 12:44 PM
THANK YOU. If there is any justice in this world, people who never bothered to learn how to use proper written English will find PASS stamped all over their scripts. Hallelujah!
Posted by: kristen | October 16, 2006 at 03:24 PM
I never thought the Elements of Style could be improved but yes,
Maira Kalman's illustrations make it even better. Has anybody out read her terrific book "What Pete Ate"?
Posted by: Barbara | October 16, 2006 at 07:02 PM
i had a kumquat once -- it had been sitting around for a while and, yes, it had lost it is flavor. you would blame a pour innocent fruit for losing some of it is flavor? like your always at the top of you're game...tsk!
although, you do make some good points. i have to agree its not smart to pick up a gun by it's barrel. whew! your rite. that guy is an idiot! whosever dumb enough to do that? not me, that's whom.
anyway, besides the flavor of fruit and dumb guys that dont know how to handle firearms, im not sure i get your point. food doesnt last forever and people make mistakes -- who died and made you einstein?
ag
ps - i hate to even mention it -- dont mean to embarrass you on you're own blog -- but if someone writes a very small screenplay you should refer to it as a 'speck' script, not a 'spec' script. (you forgot the k). that's okay -- its just a misspelling. its not like anyone would notice that.
Posted by: Alan | October 16, 2006 at 08:28 PM
Welcome Danny: Yes, that's what we're looking for... writers.
Binnie you know we aim to please.
EC happy to be of service.
Hucklecat you are fffffunnnnnny!
Writergurl: Glad to see I'm bringing out the grammarian in you...
Ann, BTW all male writers have issues with lie and lay...
MaryAn don't get me started...
Kirsten: "Justice in this world"...? I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with this concept...
Barbara, not me, but I did just pick up my copy of "The Book of Joe"...
Alan, I don get its, wasnt I been perfeckly cleer? And hey I AM Einstein, thanks you very muched!!!
Posted by: mernitman | October 16, 2006 at 10:55 PM
Billy, you should tell your male writer friends how to properly lay. Then they'll never have to lie. Ever again!
Posted by: Ann Wesley Hardin | October 17, 2006 at 02:59 AM
Billy, what exactly does it take to get you started?
Posted by: MaryAn | October 17, 2006 at 12:15 PM
MaryAn, he already told you.... a woman who's nearly drunk, almost nude and in his bed.
Pay attention!
;)
Posted by: Writergurl | October 17, 2006 at 01:01 PM
Ann, I think the lying tendency may be genetic.
MaryAn & WriterGurl: Okay, wait-wait-wait...
The woman-in-bed anecdote was actually a NON-starter and a tale told out of school unchivalrously (if that's a word), so let's put that behind us, shall we?
But "what gets me started," while ripe for humor (I'll just add that nice lingerie never hurts) is actually a really intriguing question, re: writing and inspiration -- feels post-worthy to me, so let me think on it...
Posted by: mernitman | October 17, 2006 at 01:22 PM
Thank you Billy!
My own request for the next grammar entry: "Between you and I."
That drives me fucking crazy.
Posted by: Amy F. | October 17, 2006 at 04:25 PM
Well, it's all about presentation. If you are not willing to fix all the "its - it's / their - there - they're / were - we're / are - our / lets - let's / to - two - too / whose - who's / lay - lie" mistakes, what will it say about all the possible flaws in your story telling?
It's just distracting and doesn't help you. You already have a hard enough time to convince someone to like your script. So, why make it harder?
Fix it.
Posted by: Thomas | October 17, 2006 at 06:08 PM
I just printed this post out. I am guilty as charged. Can you also write a post about people like me who start sentences with "But...?"
Posted by: Neil | October 17, 2006 at 06:09 PM
Someone I thought I liked just sent me an e-mail that ended with the following:
"Lot's of love"
My teeth are grinding. That's it. It's over.
Posted by: binnie | October 17, 2006 at 08:09 PM
Amy, between you and me, once you start going off on this stuff, there's no returning...
Thomas: Exactly.
Neil: But what's wrong with that?
Binnie: *sigh*...
Posted by: mernitman | October 17, 2006 at 10:43 PM