Richard Togher
Junior Member
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2006
- Member Type
- Student or Learner
- Native Language
- British English
- Home Country
- UK
- Current Location
- UK
Double Possession
Can you please help me understand the use of so-called ‘double possession’ as recommended below?
“The appositional ‘of’ phrase must be definite (i.e. not indefinite) and human: a friend of my mother’s is idiomatic, but a friend of the British Museum's is not”. FOWLER’S MODERN ENGLISH USAGE
First, I’m not sure what the meaning of ‘appositional’ is in this sentence – I think it refers to the two parts of a phrase saying the same thing.
I am also unsure what is meant by definite / indefinite in this context. Is it referring to the use of ‘a’ / ‘the’?
I mainly wish to know if the following, taken from a documentary should be possessive or not. It stated ‘he was a bodyguard of Indira Ghandi’
According to the rules above, should this not be possessive?
Or would it be preferable if OF was replaced with TO, if the ‘bodyguard’ is to be mentioned first, that is.
Thank you for your kind help
Can you please help me understand the use of so-called ‘double possession’ as recommended below?
“The appositional ‘of’ phrase must be definite (i.e. not indefinite) and human: a friend of my mother’s is idiomatic, but a friend of the British Museum's is not”. FOWLER’S MODERN ENGLISH USAGE
First, I’m not sure what the meaning of ‘appositional’ is in this sentence – I think it refers to the two parts of a phrase saying the same thing.
I am also unsure what is meant by definite / indefinite in this context. Is it referring to the use of ‘a’ / ‘the’?
I mainly wish to know if the following, taken from a documentary should be possessive or not. It stated ‘he was a bodyguard of Indira Ghandi’
According to the rules above, should this not be possessive?
Or would it be preferable if OF was replaced with TO, if the ‘bodyguard’ is to be mentioned first, that is.
Thank you for your kind help