+317.+ Review Lesson 4, in which we studied the possessive use of nouns.
You will recall that we make the possessive form of the nouns by the use
of the apostrophe and _s_. But instead of using the possessive forms of
the name of inanimate things; that is, things without life, we generally
denote possession by the use of a phrase. Thus we would say, _The arm of
the chair_, instead of, _The chair's arm_; or, _The roof of the house_,
instead of, _The house's roof_.
+318.+ We also use a possessive phrase when the use of a possessive form
would give an awkward construction. As, for example: _Jesus' sayings_.
So many hissing sounds are not pleasant to the ear and so, we say
instead, _The sayings of Jesus_.
+319.+ We use a phrase also where both nouns are in the plural form. In
many words, there is no difference in the sound between a single noun in
the possessive form and a plural noun in the possessive form. We can
readily tell the meaning when it is written, because the place of the
apostrophe indicates the meaning, but when it is spoken the sound is
exactly the same. As, for example:
The lady's hats.
The ladies' hats.
Written out in this way, you know that in the first instance I am
speaking of the hats belonging to one lady, but in the second instance
of the hats belonging to two or more ladies. But when it is spoken, you
can not tell whether I mean one lady or a number of ladies. So we use a
phrase and say, _The hats of the lady_; or, _The hats of the ladies_.
Then the meaning is entirely clear.
+320.+ Sometimes we want to use two possessives together, and in this
case it is better to change one of them into a phrase; for example,
_This is my comrade's father's book_. This is an awkward construction.
Say instead, _This is the book belonging to my comrade's father_.
+321.+ Do not overlook the fact, however, that the phrase beginning with
_of_ does not always mean possession. Consider the following examples
and see if there is not a difference in meaning:
The history of Wilson is interesting.
Wilson's history is interesting.
In the first instance, I mean the history of Wilson's life is
interesting; in the second instance I mean the history belongs to or
written by Wilson is interesting. So there is quite a difference in the
meaning. The phrase _of Wilson_ used in the first example does not
indicate possession.
Note the difference in meaning between the following sentences:
The picture of Millet is good.
Millet's picture is good.
The statue of Rodin stands in the park.
Rodin's statue stands in the park.
Would you say:
The invention of gunpowder, or gunpowder's invention?
The destruction of Louvain, or Louvain's destruction?
The siege of Antwerp, or Antwerp's siege?
The boat's keel, or the keel of the boat?