[Grammar] he wants that person that he's reaching out to tell everyone what he's done

[kadioguy]

Since the song is about his feelings, he wants that person that he's reaching out to tell everyone what he's done, but since it's simple it doesn't matter 'cause it's done.

https://genius.com/2893183
-------------------
1. Grammatically, should the sentence be "... he wants that person that he's reaching out to to tell everyone what he's done" ? (Because "want somebody to do something" and "reach out to someone") I know two "to" sound strange, so does just one "to" suffice?

2.
"It" refers to the song, "it" refers to "he wants that person that he's reaching out to tell everyone what he's done", and "it" refers to the song again.

Am I right in thinking this?

PS The song is Elton John's "Your Song."
----------

 

[Phaedrus]

Since the song is about his feelings, he wants that person that he's reaching out to tell everyone what he's done, but since it's simple it doesn't matter 'cause it's done.

https://genius.com/2893183
-------------------
1. Grammatically, should the sentence be "... he wants that person that he's reaching out to to tell everyone what he's done" ? (Because "want somebody to do something" and "reach out to someone")

Yes, that's exactly right.

I know two "to" sound strange, so does just one "to" suffice?

No, it sounds perfectly natural and correct and is grammatically required. There is an intonation boundary between the first and second "to."

He wants [the person that he is reaching out to] [to tell everyone what he's done].

I changed "that person that" to "the person that." That part of the sentence is the only part that sounds a little awkward to me. You could also say:

He wants the person who(m) he is reaching out to to tell everyone what he's done.
He wants the person to whom he is reaching out to tell everyone what he's done.

If you don't like having two "to"s in a row, that last variation pre-poses the first "to." It's still there, though. It has to be.

 

[kadioguy]

Since the song is about his feelings, he wants that person that he's reaching out to tell everyone what he's done, but since it's simple it doesn't matter 'cause it's done.

https://genius.com/2893183
-------------------
2.
"It" refers to the song, "it" refers to "he wants that person that he's reaching out to tell everyone what he's done", and "it" refers to the song again.

Am I right in thinking this?

PS The song is Elton John's "Your Song."

Could someone please help with this question?

 

[jutfrank]

I don't understand your second question. Can you rephrase it?

Which it are you referring to?

 

[kadioguy]

I don't understand your second question. Can you rephrase it?

Which it are you referring to?

How about this way? I am clarifying what the three "it" refer to respectively. Am I right in thinking this?

--------------
Since the song is about his feelings, he wants that person that he's reaching out to tell everyone what he's done, but since it (= the song)'s simple it (= he wants that person that he's reaching out to tell everyone what he's done, or = the song?) doesn't matter 'cause it (= the song)'s done.

 

[kadioguy]

Have I made it too complicated? OK, I am trying another way.

----------
Since the song is about his feelings, he wants that person that he's reaching out to tell everyone what he's done, but since it's simple it doesn't matter 'cause it's done.
---------

There are three "it" in the paragraph above, and what they refer to respectively? Could you please help me?

a. it's simple
b. it doesn't matter
c. 'cause it's done

 

[Phaedrus]

a. it's simple
b. it doesn't matter
c. 'cause it's done

The "it" in (a) and the "it" in (c) have the same referent as they do in Elton John's "It may be quite simple, but now that it's done." They refer to the song.

The "it" in "it doesn't matter" refers to whatever referent the person who wrote that ungrammatical sentence had in his or her confused mind at the time.

 

[tedmc]

There are three "it's" in the paragraph above, and what do they refer to [STRIKE]respectively[/STRIKE]?

That is not how you use "respectively".
Example:
The first, second and third "it" refer to xxx, xxx and xxx respectively.

 

[Tarheel]

Have I made it too complicated? OK, I am trying another way.

----------
Since the song is about his feelings, he wants that person that he's reaching out to to tell everyone what he's done, but since it's simple it doesn't matter 'cause it's done.
---------

There are three "it"s in the paragraph above. What they refer to respectively? Could you please help me?

a. it's simple
b. it doesn't matter
c. 'cause it's done

a. the situation

I have a feeling that all three its refer to the same thing (but I could be wrong).

 

[kadioguy]

There are three "it's" in the paragraph above

I have a feeling that all three its refer to the same thing (but I could be wrong).

By the way, three "its" or three "it's", which is correct?

 

[Rover_KE]

three its or three 'it's.

In the second version, 'it' is enclosed in single quotation marks; they're not apostrophes.

 

[kadioguy]

By the way, three "its" or three "it's", which is correct?

three its or three 'it's.

In the second version, 'it' is enclosed in single quotation marks; they're not apostrophes.

I have found more information:

-----------
Words which do not usually have plurals sometimes have an apostrophe when
a plural form is written.

It is a nice idea, but there are a lot of if's.

Apostrophes are used in the plurals of letters, and sometimes of numbers and
abbreviations.

He writes h's instead of d's.
It was in the early 1960's. [More usuauy: ... 1960s.)
I know two MP's personally. (More usually: ... MPs.)

It is not correct to put apostrophes in normal plurals.
JEANS - HALF PRICE (NOT JEAN'S ... )

(Quoted from Practical English Usage 3rd)
-------------------
The apostrophe is sometimes used with -s to form the plural of letters, numerals, abbreviations, symbols, and words used as words.

Letters are usually pluralized with - 's

mind your p's and q's

although capital letters are sometimes pluralized with -s alone.

The use of -'s to form the plurals of numerals, abbreviations and symbols is not now as common as pluralization with simple -s; 1970s, CPUs, &s are more likely to be found than their apostrophized counterparts. A dissent can be found in Safire 1980; he prefers 1980's, and the 80's to the '80s.

Words used as words—such as might be given as examples from a text: too many howsoever's—are usually pluralized with -'s. But words representing sounds or words used as words in common phrases are pluralized with -s alone:

the oohs and aahs of the crowd
the whys and wherefores of the issue
Theodore Bernstein's Dos, Don'ts & Maybes of English Usage

(Quoted from Webster's Dictionary of English Usage)

 

[tedmc]

As I said earlier on, it makes more sense to me to use the "apostrophe s" with "it"(though old-fashioned), since there is the likely confusion with the possessive "its".

 

[Rover_KE]

Can you give us a sample sentence to illustrate that potential confusion, Ted?

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

[/FONT]

By the way, three "its" or three "it's", which is correct?

It's is short for it is. Its is a possessive pronoun.

 

[Phaedrus]

It's is short for it is. Its is a possessive pronoun.

Indeed. There are no ifs, ands, or buts about it.

If we really wanted to strain ourselves, we could try to form the plurals of its (possessive) and it's (contraction).

Presumably, tedmc would opt for its's in the former case and it's's in the latter.

I'd prefer one of Rover's styles: "its"s and "it's"s. With the -es plural marker, maybe italics would look nicer: itses and it'ses.

In truth, I would try to avoid the problem altogether by talking about the "three uses/instances/tokens of its or it's."