I’m assuming English isn’t your first language, but “IPoAC would’ve it’s purpose” is grammatically awkward. “Would’ve” doesn’t really work for possession. Instead you can use “would have,” but people would typically say “IPoAC has it’s purpose”
Thanks for the clarification. You’re right, English isn’t my first language.
I’m a bit confused by your sentence:
““Would’ve” me doesn’t really work fur possession. Instead you can use “would have””
That’s the same thing, isn’t it?
My idea with using “would’ve” was that IPoAC would have it’s purpose, if it was a thing. I’m missing the descriptive word in either language right now.
The word “have” is used in two different ways. One way is to own or hold something, so if I’m holding a pencil, I have it. But another way is as a way so signal different tenses (as in grammatical tense) so you can say “I shouldn’t have done it” or “they have tried it before.” The contraction “'ve” is only used for tense, but not to own something. So, the phrase “they’ve it” is grammatically incorrect.
I’m assuming English isn’t your first language, but “IPoAC would’ve it’s purpose” is grammatically awkward. “Would’ve” doesn’t really work for possession. Instead you can use “would have,” but people would typically say “IPoAC has it’s purpose”
Thanks for the clarification. You’re right, English isn’t my first language.
I’m a bit confused by your sentence:
That’s the same thing, isn’t it? My idea with using “would’ve” was that IPoAC would have it’s purpose, if it was a thing. I’m missing the descriptive word in either language right now.
The word “have” is used in two different ways. One way is to own or hold something, so if I’m holding a pencil, I have it. But another way is as a way so signal different tenses (as in grammatical tense) so you can say “I shouldn’t have done it” or “they have tried it before.” The contraction “'ve” is only used for tense, but not to own something. So, the phrase “they’ve it” is grammatically incorrect.