Retriever Puppy kicked by band members in Prospect Park

winstonsmith wrote: But not every dog (or dog owner) is perfect.

But what is someone who does not want a dog on his leg do when it jumps on my leg and the owner starts telling me it is ok to pet it..

Say no thanks and walk away?

this discussion has become unmoored from its hitch

"giddy goldie mauls mollycoddled musician" was the gist


or was it "band member defends band"

veets wrote: [quote=caseopele][quote=winstonsmith]But not every dog (or dog owner) is perfect.

But what is someone who does not want a dog on his leg do when it jumps on my leg and the owner starts telling me it is ok to pet it..

Say no thanks and walk away?


Good suggestion.. walk away.. no harm done. but remove yourself from the situation and Walk Away!

How do does one get a dog off their leg?

The possessive of "one" is "one's," not "their."

To continue this harmlessly bifurcated thread...

felbrigge psalter wrote: [quote=BrooklynBoyyee]"Their" is plural possessive and should never be used as a singular. Even though it might be awkward, it's best to use "his/her" in its place, particularly when one does not know the gender of the possessive subject.

Is it okay to use "your" to refer to both plural and singular possessive? Or would you prefer "thine" for singular possessive?

According to a recent piece in the NYT on this topic, respected writers have used "their" as the singular possessive for centuries. "His/her" is a recent invention, something cooked up by undersexed bureaucrats.

Regarding your point about "your", the word "you" may be either singular or plural. "They" is only plural, so your comparison is not valid.


"Fowler's English Usage" (the original, 1926... wish I had the revised) has, in the section "NUMBER, 11" (p. 391-2), after listing: A - "himself or herself"; B - "themselves"; C - "himself".

"No-one who can help it chooses A ; it is correct, & is sometimes necessary, but it is so clumsy as to be ridiculous except when expliciteness is urgent, & it usually sounds like a bit of pedantic humour. B is the popular solution ; it sets the literary man's teeth on edge, & he exerts himself to give the same meaning in some entirely different way if he is not prepared, as he usually is [that is, NOT prepared], to risk C; but it should be recorded that the OED, which quotes examples under every, they, & themselves, refrains from any word of condemnation [I assume he means condemnation of B].

"C is here recommended . It involves the convention that where the matter of sex is not conspicuous or important [quelle naïveté!] he & his shall be allowed to represent a person instead of a man.... Whether that, with A in the background for especial exactitudes, & paraphrase always possible in dubious cases, is an arrogant demand on the part of male England, everyone must decide for himself (or for himself or herself, or for themselves)." [grammarians are by tradition witty]

Of course, this is Georgian (V) England, not Eyewitness News America. Still, he does mention that the OED accepts "their", so felbrigge has a point. For me, Fowler hits it dead center: "it sets the literary man's teeth on edge".

Oh well, as lnog as we all unetradnsd ecah ohetr, rhgit?