Pronoun Rules

Possessive Pronouns Pronouns are nifty little tools for consolidating your writing. Instead of repeating a noun over and over within the same sentence, you can simply replace it with a pronoun. The meaning stays clear and the message is concise. Compare the following sentences: When Arjun spilled the coffee, the coffee drenched all the papers that Arjun was working on and the coffee made the papers nearly illegible. When Arjun spilled the coffee, it drenched all the papers that he was working on and it made them nearly illegible. You understand the meaning in either case, but one sounds unnecessarily wordy. Conversations would be much longer if pronouns didn’t exist. So let’s get down to the nitty-gritty of what pronouns are and how they work. A pronoun is a word that can replace a noun or a noun phrase. We use them all the time without even noticing. When you point to a soda and ask “Can you hand me that?” you’re using a pronoun. They’re even simple in terms of the CAT. You’ve got to keep in mind three things: The pronoun must have an antecedent (defined below). The pronoun and antecedent must agree in number. The pronoun must be unambiguous. Let’s dive in to what these rules mean. Rule 1: The pronoun must have an antecedent. An “antecedent” is the noun or noun phrase that the pronoun refers to. If we revisit our example of coffee spilling, you should find three pronouns, each with its own antecedent. Try to spot all three pairs before reading on to the explanation. When Arjun spilled the coffee, it drenched all the papers that he was working on and it made them nearly illegible. The first pronoun in the sentence is “it.” “It” is the thing that’s drenching the papers, so we can reason that “it” must be the coffee. “Coffee” is the antecedent to “it.” Hopefully you were able to pair the other two as well: “he” and “Arjun”, “them” and “all the papers.” Typically, you’re not reading a sentence on its own, you’re reading it in the context of a paragraph or a larger article. Therefore, it’s entirely acceptable to write a sentence with a pronoun referring to an antecedent in a different sentence. But on Sentence Correction questions, we’re restricted to a single sentence, so the antecedent must actually show up in the same sentence. See whether you can spot the error here: Without realizing her mistake, Ana continued to overcook the squash, finally serving a dinner that they were not satisfied with. Did you think the misbehaving pronoun was “her”? If so, you were wrong. “Her” has an antecedent: Ana. The fact that the noun comes after the pronoun is inconsequential, as long as the relationship is clear. The actual culprit was “they.” Who’s they? The family members? The customers in Ana’s restaurant? The Ambassador to New Guinea and his wife? Based on this sentence, we have no idea. The antecedent is not present. If you missed this, you probably didn’t even realize a pronoun was present. The number one reason why test takers choose answers that violate this first pronoun rule is that they don’t see the pronoun. So be on the lookout! Practice recognizing pronouns in emails you send, books you read, even ads on buses. In particular, be sure to pause every time you see any of the five most commonly tested pronouns: It Its They Them Their Once you spot it, verify that it has an antecedent. Rule 2: The pronoun and antecedent must agree in number. If you consider the five common pronouns listed above, there’s a significant difference between the first two and final three. “It” and “its” replace singular antecedent, while “they,” “them,” and “their” all replace plural antecedents. Simple illustrations: The watermelon is delicious and Sheri just can’t get enough of it. Jorge was able to juggle three balls at a time, but only for about a minute before he dropped them. So while you’re checking that the antecedent is present within the sentence, check that it actually agrees with the pronoun as well. Rule 3: The pronoun must be unambiguous. This is the hardest rule to enforce. Sometimes things sound ambiguous when they’re not. Sometimes you think they’re fine when there’s a major problem. Test yourself to see if you can spot the presence (or absence) of ambiguity: All the people in the room gasped when Jacob and Hans revealed their evil plot. Boots, including knee-highs and ankle-highs, come into fashion during colder months when they are a practical choice. The first sentence is ambiguous, the second one is not. Nope, that’s not a mistake. The only pronoun in the first sentence is “their” and the meaning the author intended (speaking as the author) was not the revelation of Jacob’s and Hans’s evil plot. Consider who else “their” could refer to. It’s plural, so it needs to be a plural noun or noun phrase, and there is another candidate present. All the people! The people in the room were shocked when Jacob and Hans betrayed them by revealing the group’s evil plot. Such betrayal! How could you know that my intended meaning was a vast group conspiracy rather than just a pair of troublemakers? You couldn’t. I gave no hints to that meaning in my sentence. But you also couldn’t know that wasn’t my intended meaning. The two plural nouns are both decent candidates for antecedents, so the sentence is ambiguous. If I change it to: All the people in the room gasped when Jacob and Hans revealed the people’s evil plot. then we would have no ambiguity. The ambiguity is removed by replacing the pronoun with its antecedent. It’s longer, but clearer. “But wait, Emily!” . If the issue is just that you need only one plural noun to go with the plural antecedent, isn’t the second sentence (reproduced below) also ambiguous? Boots, which include both knee-highs and ankle-highs, come into fashion during colder months when they are a practical choice. We have three plural nouns: boots, knee-highs, and ankle-highs. Couldn’t “they” refer to any of them and doesn’t that make this sentence ambiguous? I’m so glad you asked. The answer is no. The two types of boots are being used as a descriptor (go back to our noun modifier post for a refresher on that if you’d like). “Boots” is the subject of the sentence, and “they” is the subject of a dependent clause (when they are a practical choice). You could reasonably match up two subjects, but it’s unlikely you’d match a subject with a random noun within a modifier. . In your first glance, imagine you recognize that the endings of the five answer choices are: A) … than they were B) … than they are C) … than it is D) … then it was E) … than it was All of these answers have a pronoun. You don’t have the option of changing it back to a more clear, but less concise, noun. So we’re stuck with it. Go figure out if the antecedent is singular or plural, and eliminate accordingly. (Bonus points if you caught that D has an additional red flag.) But in the situation that the ending of the answer choices are: A) … than they were B) … than they are C) … than the books were D) … then the books are E) … than the books are you need to go see if a pronoun is even reasonable. Does the presence of “they” introduce ambiguity? It will take practice and patience to make the right determination.