Why "a Jehovah's Witness" is grammatically wrong

[Sallyforth]

Just a note about the English language: I have taken several English classes in college and no professor ever graded a paper the same. For example, I submitted the exact same paper (as it worked for 2 different assignments) to 2 different English professors. One marked up my punctuation like crazy and I received a C. The other marked up just one comma placement and gave me an A. I didn't make a single change!

English tends to be VERY subjective. Please don't nit pick at each other. Both may be completely acceptable possibilities.

I just thought we were having a little fun. The English language is absurd, indeed!

[trottigy]

I just thought we were having a little fun. The English language is absurd, indeed!

 

 

 

[Beggar for the Spirit]

Besides the priority of being sure that all magazines and books

have accurate truth and accurate facts stated, the FDS has

also done their best to write with no grammatical errors if possible.

As we know that is why there are many well trained proof readers

working at the various Bethel locations around the world.

 

So I typed "Jehovah's witness" and also "a Jehovah's witness" in the search of

the WT library to see if the FDS ever uses this term.

And all the times either of these terms are used is only when

someone was being quoted - a newspaper, an author, an interview, etc.

I went all the way back going back to the 1980s!

There were never any times that the FDS used these terms except

1 time, but notice why it was used here below:

 

__________________________________________________________________________________

*** w95 9/1 p. 12 par. 17 Witnesses Against the False God ***
It was when prophesying Israel’s return from Babylonian exile that the prophet Isaiah was inspired to pen the words of Isaiah 43:10, saying that Israel was Jehovah’s witness, his servant.
 

*** w95 9/1 p. 18 Christian Witnesses for Divine Sovereignty ***
Who replaced Israel as Jehovah’s “witness” to the nations?

__________________________________________________________________________________

 

We can see the reason why Jehovah's "witness" is used here

because there was only 1 witness that existed at that time, 1 nation that was a "witness".

Yet they did not phrase it,

"Israel was a Jehovah's Witness".

 

I also looked at the reference that Brother Jerry posted of the 1989 yearbook pgs 3-13.

Jerry was right, there is the phrase "Jehovah's witness"

but like all the other references I found,  it was written this way because someone else

is being quoted. Notice here below:

________________________________________________________________________________

*** yb89 pp. 8-9 1989 Yearbook of Jehovah’s Witnesses ***
. He was intrigued by our name, Jehovah’s Witnesses. Instead of lunging into line the next day, he tried to provoke me.

The conversation went like this:
“‘You say you’re a Jehovah’s Witness. Well, show me in the Bible where God says we should be his witnesses.’
 

*** yb89 p. 8 1989 Yearbook of Jehovah’s Witnesses ***
The boy told his grandparents all about the things he was learning, especially the Paradise hope.

He even said to them:

“I want you to become Jehovah’s Witnesses and be with me in Paradise.”

______________________________________________________________________________

 

(Side Point)
I thought these 2 quotes were interesting because it shows that when the FDS

quotes a person, they are exact in the quote. Even if the person

said something not grammatically correct, the FDS does not change the

words of the person to make it grammatically correct.

This just adds more confidence to everything that the FDS writes!
 

Edited December 3, 2014 by Beggar for the Spirit

[GrumpysWife]

A couple of years ago we had an entire talk by our circuit overseer about this subject. He said, among other things, the reason that we should say "I am one of Jehovah's Witnesses" is because we are showing that we understand that we are witnesses of Jehovah, which makes us a possession of Him. Therefore showing respect for him. 

[Beggar for the Spirit]

Excellent post Vernalee!

 

Saying "I am 1 of Jehovah's witnesses" is grammatically correct because

it emphasizes a relationship between the 1st noun(Jehovah) and the 2nd noun(witness).

1 belongs to the other.

Thanks for your post about this talk by the Circuit Overseer!

Edited December 3, 2014 by Beggar for the Spirit

[Sheep]

I'm not an expert on English grammar either, although I feel I have a good "handle" on it.

 

Grammatically, it is not correct to say "I am a Jehovah's Witness." Why? Well, here is the "technical" reason...

 

As a general rule, you cannot have an article in conjuction with a possessive noun or possessive pronoun. That's about the quickest "technical" reason I can think of.

 

We have two articles in English, the definite article the and the indefinite article a or an. The name Jehovah is a noun; with 's at the end makes it possessive. The pronoun to replace Jehovah would be him, and the possessive pronoun is his. With our example "a Jehovah's Witness," the a is an indefinite article. Jehovah's is a possessive noun.

 

Just as it would not be right to say "a his Witness" (indefinite article with a possessive pronoun), it would not be correct to say "a Jehovah's Witness" either (indefinite article with a possessive noun). Correspondingly, we also sometimes hear the expression "the Jehovah's Witnesses" (definite article with the possessive noun). This not correct either.

 

As far as the argument that we are using the name Jehovah's Witness as a title, I don't think that really counts here. Our "title" is Jehovah's Witnesses (plural), not Jehovah's Witness (singular). However, I haven't seen anything in grammar books that discuss that.

 

Are you with me so far? (congratulations)

 

That may be the technical, grammatical reason not to say "a Jehovah's Witness." But as someone pointed out here, it is not necessary to be nit-picky about it. The fact that the FDS has never published anything explaining how to say Jehovah's Witnesses in a singular form is a good indication that it's not that big of an issue. It's not something we should lose sleep over.

 

That is grammatically incorrect! You can't end a sentence with a preposition! Now, how do you say that again? (It's not something over which we should lose sleep?)

[Sheep]

The old way we learned this was that if you took that expression and changed it to it's simplest structure, it would be easy to figure out.

 

For instance, you would know immediately that if your sentence ended as '"It is me that bought the gift"' that you wouldn't ever say '"Me bought the gift"', you would say '"I bought the gift"'. So in that case, we were taught to do this little mental trick to see if what you said made sense. Hence, the sound test.

 

However, despite all that, I still say "It's me!" (in most situations) because...ha ha, it sounds so completely unnatural to say, "It is I." You get all kinds of funny looks from people when you talk that way!

 

Actually, it's supposed to be "It's me." The subjective personal pronoun would be "I," but in this phrase it is objective.

 

Hence, your sound test works!

[Sallyforth]

Me am not so sure anymore!

[Beggar for the Spirit]

Hi Brother Eric,

 

I really liked your description here below, this is what I have been trying

to say but could not remember the proper grammatical expressions.

So thanks for your post!

 

"you cannot have an article in conjunction with a possessive noun or possessive pronoun."

 

[trottigy]

I'm not an expert on English grammar either, although I feel I have a good "handle" on it.

 

Grammatically, it is not correct to say "I am a Jehovah's Witness." Why? Well, here is the "technical" reason...

 

As a general rule, you cannot have an article in conjuction with a possessive noun or possessive pronoun. That's about the quickest "technical" reason I can think of.

 

We have two articles in English, the definite article the and the indefinite article a or an. The name Jehovah is a noun; with 's at the end makes it possessive. The pronoun to replace Jehovah would be him, and the possessive pronoun is his. With our example "a Jehovah's Witness," the a is an indefinite article. Jehovah's is a possessive noun.

 

Just as it would not be right to say "a his Witness" (indefinite article with a possessive pronoun), it would not be correct to say "a Jehovah's Witness" either (indefinite article with a possessive noun). Correspondingly, we also sometimes hear the expression "the Jehovah's Witnesses" (definite article with the possessive noun). This not correct either.

 

As far as the argument that we are using the name Jehovah's Witness as a title, I don't think that really counts here. Our "title" is Jehovah's Witnesses (plural), not Jehovah's Witness (singular). However, I haven't seen anything in grammar books that discuss that.

 

Are you with me so far? (congratulations)

 

That may be the technical, grammatical reason not to say "a Jehovah's Witness." But as someone pointed out here, it is not necessary to be nit-picky about it. The fact that the FDS has never published anything explaining how to say Jehovah's Witnesses in a singular form is a good indication that it's not that big of an issue. It's not something we should lose sleep over.

 

That is grammatically incorrect! You can't end a sentence with a preposition! Now, how do you say that again? (It's not something over which we should lose sleep?)

 

And this is true IF you are using Jehovah's Witness as a possessive noun - rather than a TITLE, but it does NOT hold - IF you are using it as a title - as we have seen done in many of the quotes.

 

Have fun with English.  

 

Another example:

 

 

 

Hosted by The Today's Show's Matt Lauer, Al Roker, and Savannah Guthrie, the 2014 Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade that happened on Thursday featured not only world famous acts, but local acts as well.

Read more: http://www.ecumenicalnews.com/article/macys-thanksgiving-day-parade-recap-highlights-macys-celebrate-2014-hits-27366#ixzz3KsmdV8XP

 

Note the article in conjunction with the possessive, but here it is a TITLE - so it is grammatically correct.

 

As in, "what just went by?"

 

Answer, "Oh, it was a Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade."

Edited December 4, 2014 by trottigy

[carlos]

I asked this same question today in a language forum I frequent, called WordReference. But nobody there understood the question correctly, and it turned into a discussion of what do Jehovah's Witnesses call ourselves, and whether everybody should accept our usage or rather call us as they prefer. 

[trottigy]

I asked this same question today in a language forum I frequent, called WordReference. But nobody there understood the question correctly, and it turned into a discussion of what do Jehovah's Witnesses call ourselves, and whether everybody should accept our usage or rather call us as they prefer. 

 

Use the Macy's Day Parade example instead.

 

Ask if it is grammatically correct to say "it is a Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade" or does one have to say - "it is one of Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parades"? OR if both are correct.

Edited December 4, 2014 by trottigy

[trottigy]

I had 2 recent experiences that reminded me of this thread:

 

1. I was in a class using my tablet and the person next to me saw my Pappa John's Pizza app on it and said, "Hey I have a Pappa John's Pizza app on my phone too. In fact I order a Pappa John's pizza just yesterday."

 

I thought - hmmm a in front of a possessive - interesting. Would any of you say "I ordered one of Pappa John's pizza yesterday"? No, but maybe "I ordered one of Pappa John's pizzas (with the s on the end)". So it is really about a PLURAL possessive - vs singular - whether the a belongs or net, eh?

 

2. This happened this morning. Debbie was looking at People magazine - the Fall 2014 edition and there was an article in it about Coco Rocha and a picture with her mom and her jumping on a bed. The article quotes her as saying, "I am a Jehovah's Witness." So, I looked online to link to it for this - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2263340/Supermodel-Coco-Rocha-opens-life-devout-Jehovahs-Witness--preaches-door-door.html

 

That is not the same article, but this one quotes her and shows the usage of  "a".

 

SO, my take away - if "Jehovah's Witness" is used in the singular - "a" is perfectly acceptable in from of it. If plural then "one of" is correct.

[Hope]

"A" Papa John's pizza is correct because Papa John isn't a person, it's a brand name.  You would say "one of Papa John's pizzas" if John was your papa.

 

Jehovah is not a brand name, He is a person and since we belong to Him, we are "one of" His Witnesses...  I never do like the sound of "a Jehovah's Witness".  It's different from saying a Baptist or a Catholic...

[trottigy]

"A" Papa John's pizza is correct because Papa John isn't a person, it's a brand name. You would say "one of Papa John's pizzas" if John was your papa.

Jehovah is not a brand name, He is a person and since we belong to Him, we are "one of" His Witnesses... I never do like the sound of "a Jehovah's Witness". It's different from saying a Baptist or a Catholic...

Even if John was your pappa, one will still say "I had a Pappa John's pizza" singular. Only if there were more available (plural) would you say "one of".

This is still a plural vs singular issue.

Edited December 4, 2014 by trottigy

[Lloyd777]

May I just add that saying I'm a "Jehovah Witness", or I'm a "Jehovah's Witness" does indeed sound incorrect, whether indeed one can make a case for it being grammatically correct or not. 

 

If I'm a householder and someone comes to the door saying "I'm a Jehovah's Witness", that immediately informs me that this person may not be so bright, which is not generally the foot I want to start on, if you get my drift.

[Musky]

May I just add that saying I'm a "Jehovah Witness", or I'm a "Jehovah's Witness" does indeed sound incorrect, whether indeed one can make a case for it being grammatically correct or not. 

 

If I'm a householder and someone comes to the door saying "I'm a Jehovah's Witness", that immediately informs me that this person may not be so bright, which is not generally the foot I want to start on, if you get my drift.

 

I think both of your examples are the same?

[CHecker]

I did lousy in English in school and now I know why, too many weird variations/explanations. I never could keep it straight.

 

And I ordered Papa John's Pizza today! Thin crust. 

[Musky]

I think both of your examples are the same?

Nevermind. I see the difference now that I'm using my laptop. Sorry

[trottigy]

When I hear that at the door I always say, "Cool I am a Jehovah's Witness too. What congregation do you go to?" (Gal. 6:10)

But, I suppose one could chose differently.

Edited December 4, 2014 by trottigy

[Lloyd777]

>"When I hear that at the door I always say, "Cool I am a Jehovah's Witness too. What congregation do you go to?""

 

Me too Jerry!  I'd never hold it against a bro if they used grammar that seemed off to me, like if they used the expression "bro" instead of "brother".  Hey, we come from all walks of life and educational levels, and no one is "better" than another, right?

 

But what I was referring to was the impression we might give to a non-witness householder, especially when we are in service, at least in some circumstances.  Pretty sure our guidebooks recommend proper grammar, as far as it is possible with us, minimizing any negative impact that "non-grammatical sounding" language might have, which could initially turn someone off or give an impression that we are under-educated.  Dollars to doughnuts, that's what a CO has in mind when he speaks of what is the better usage.

 

Sorry I didn't make that clearer.

[rocket]

O.K. after reading all this thread I'll accept most any way of saying it but I do draw the line when a bro. says "I'm a jahover witness." That one gets to me.

[timpin]

Jerry if your JW apps were as prominent on your tablet as your pizza app, I wouldn't be having a beer and pizza for dinner tonight  ...   PapaDominoHut - this thread makes me hungry.

Edited December 4, 2014 by timpin

[trottigy]

Non-Jws are the ones MOST likely to say "a JW" and see it as a title. I wouldn't worry about them thinking less of us than they already do. At least in regards to that.

Personally, I go with an intro about a topic rather than saying, "hi, I'm a JW." That seems to turn them off.

[Qapla]

No matter how you look at it and want to dissect it - regardless of what we think sounds the best or how we like to say it or here it said ....

 

The original question asked if a particular wording of it was grammatically correct .... the answer is - YES - it is grammatically correct ..... so are several of the other ways of saying it.

 

Oh, and by-the-way, Papa John is a real person AND a business.

The Papa John's restaurant franchise was founded in 1983 when "Papa" John Schnatter knocked out a broom closet in the back of his father's tavern, Mick's Lounge, in Jeffersonville, Indiana. He then sold his 1971 Z28 Camaro to purchase $1,600 worth of used pizza equipment and began selling pizzas to the tavern's customers out of the converted closet. His pizzas proved so popular that one year later he was able to move into an adjoining space. Papa John's is now the fourth largest take-out and delivery pizza restaurant chain in the United States.