the hunger of the lion vs. the lion's hunger

Firstly I had opposed my teacher when he said in our lesson about the (( genitive )) this sentence : The lion’s hunger.
Of course we can say the hungry lion, but it does not save the same meaning into translation to Arabic , and we can say : the hunger of the lion ( of construction)
2- When I returned to our course book ( The university grammar by Qurick ) the wellknow auther I find the same sentence then I am admired !!
3- I asked a one native’s English girl , she replied that she didn’t hear or has learned such sentence in English and she was admired also.
4- We learned that English natives have differed between the higer animal and the sub-degree animals like cat , mice, ants …etc. and for example they say the tale of cat and not (( cat’s tale )) or (( The legs of the ant )) not ant’s legs for example.

My question:
So why these difference or comparisons between animals type in language?
Didn’t they all animals and have to treat in the same manner in our language?
Of course the pronoun It is for the inanimate and animals, (( he , she )) for the human beings , and all animals are not human being characteristics alike and should be considered as a same in language , the lion has not human being property aswell as ants.

Sorry for the long wait. There are so many posts some days that it is easy to miss some.

I’m not entirely sure what you are trying to get at, but:

It is perfectly correct in English to say, “The lion’s hunger…” which means the same thing as “The hunger of the lion”. You need to look up work on the possessive apostrophe to see more examples.
You are wrong about number 4. It is perfectly acceptable to say “the cat’s tail…” “the ant’s legs…” “the mouses’s whiskers…” and so on as well as to say “The tail of the cat”, “The legs of the ant,” and "the whiskers of the mouse.

All animals are treated equally as far as grammar is concerned. You appear to have been badly misinformed. Maybe the native English girl was having a laugh at your expense.

Maybe she is a great fan of George Orwell’s and believes in his famous quote.

All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.

Please read the universal grammar editioin 1999 wich marked by the press of Longman , page 97 the genitive and reference , you can find uses of language dealing with higher animals and lower animals.
Now I have not sufficient of time and I shall reply sooner as possible.
BUT , inshort for example we can use the pronoun ( she , he ) for such higer animal races which is not able with the lowers.
I shall later discuss the mater extensivly.

I won’t be reading that text (even if I can clearly recognise it).

your says : you will not read the book even you are clearly recognise it , this is your matter , and I won’t force you to search about it , I didn’t produce something from my pocket , then I didn’t say it’s general rule , it is option.
2- again the previous user has comfirmed the sentence (( which I asked about : the lion’s hunger )) And exactly my question about this sentence only, not to introduce more affairs , the grammer is differently wide, more writers and authors , again my quesion put under opinion of the yahoo page answer , which more native speakers visit when the British girl whose name still I know , said she didn’t hear by this sentence and she reply that the more correct to say (( the hunger of the lion )).
of course now I am satisfied the both are correct.
but dear friend again that book I have mentioned is valuable book by well author the Qurick who is respectable by us , lastly wait me to show you what contain.

Sorry Mohammad, but from what you’ve told me about the contents of the book, I don’t feel it is at all valuable. Either you have misunderstood what is written or it is misleading.

By the way, I believe I am the person you refer to as ‘the previous user’.

Hi! Sir Torsten!!
I really thankful to you sir because I always got big scores in my english exam.
I always study! and its very interesting at all!

Thank you More power and GOD BLESS!!

The difference between higher animals and lower animals in English language uses :
Firstly I shall say sorry to that I have mixed between the gender and genitive , but I am perfefetly sure that there are quiet difference in uses , take the followed table and brief shortage information, hopefully to be satisfied:
my former question : what you say?

Gender and genitive
1- Gender: includes the: a - animate ((personal – human, non personal – non human)). And: the inanimate
Table: a to e : personal , d to i non personal , j – inanimate

Pronoun substitution Examples Gender classes
Who, he Uncle. a- masculine.
Who, she Aunt. b- feminine.
Who- she he Doctor c- dual.
Who- he she it , which – it Baby. d- common.
Which - it , who-they Family e- collection.
Which- it, ? Who- she Bull f- higher animals ( M)
Which – it , who- she Cow g- higher animals feminine.
Which – it she France h- higher organization.
Which – it Ant i- lower animals.
which-it box j- inanimate.
This table shows the different types of individuals in grammar uses according to its relation from the higher top to the lower bottom, i.e. its reference in gender relation.
2-lists of higher animals:
Buck : doe bull : cow cock : hen dog : bitch gander : goose lion : lioness
Stallion : mare tiger : tigress
Lower animals and inanimate nouns:

Lower animals do not differ from inanimate nouns in terms of our present linguistics criteria, e.g. (snake, ant, and box) have which and it as pronouns. Sex difference can, however, be indicated by a range of gender markers for any animate noun when they are felt to be relevant, e.g. she- goat, he- goat, male-frog, hen-pheasant.

Choice of the of- genitive:

The of- genitive is chiefly used with nouns that belong to the bottom part of the obvious table above, that is especially with inanimate nouns, e.g. the title of the book. The interior of the room. In these two examples, an ( S ) genitive would be fully acceptable, but in many instance this is not so, e.g. the hub of the wheel, the windows of the houses. Related no doubt to the point made about information focus, and the corresponding personal pronoun would normally have the inflected genitive: its hub, their windows … etc…
However we make opposition in this matter, but it is very clear that there are differences between higher animals and lower animals in using the personal pronouns and the higher can take the personal- human pronouns ( he or she ) in additional to the relative pronoun of human beings ( who ) , but the lower animal like snake, ant could not.
I interpreter the reason is that English people love that types of higher animals and made them as a symbol of strong or beauty, for examples the horse , lion , elephant, etc… And even they call inanimate things as so, for example ship. Look to this example:
What a lovely ship! What is she called?

Hi Mohammad Ahmad,

First of all, I do not believe you have misunderstood that text/lesson where you read about this difference that is supposedly made between large animals and small animals in the English language grammar.
I only attended a short English language course ten years ago (he, he…), and now that I have just read what you wrote here, I clearly remember I was taught the same thing regarding this ‘‘differentiation’’. I thought it was the strangest thing ever, and when I asked what the logic behind it all was, my teacher could not explain, she only said it was one of the those things we would have to learn by heart.

( Based on the fact that this is obviously taught in more than just one country, my question to Beeesneees would be: is it possible that this is some old rule that does not apply anymore ? )

As far as I am concerned I am going to take Beeesneees’ word on this one. Just think about it: what are the odds that she would not know about this ‘‘rule’’ ?! These constructions we are talking about are used all the time in every day English.

In conclusion, I say: let’s not worry too much about the English language intricacies…not yet, anyway; not until we will have reached a good level of proficiency in English.

By the way, your sentences ramble quite a bit. Therefore, sorry to say, it is pretty difficult for the reader to understand what you mean and/or what it is you would like to know. My advice to you, from an English learner to another, is that you try and make shorter sentences for starters. Also, as our teachers and the founders of this website advise us: use full stops/periods at the end of each sentence, leave a space after it and start each new sentence with a capital letter.

Take care

It is impossible to follow your argument for the whole text, or your explanation, I’m afraid. (See Cristina’s comments)

However you are wrong in your conclusion. I think you are mixing up personal pronouns with animal genders, and even there you are incorrect (bull elephant, cow elephant / lion, lioness/ Billy goat, Nanny goat / Drone bee, queen bee )

Your final interpretation is also incorrect.

The previous written message which is parted from the mentioned book the University Grammar is the pour details which confirm what I had said and, however, I tried to copy specific pages from the book and send there , but not succeeded , then I made the table by diagram figures but, the copy of the document did not fit the limited space of here.

you are the wrong , who did not respect the others feelings , and you the last one are mystery enough to be follow. Be human and read the mentioned book or keep silent not to see your message again. I didn’t offer something from clear atmosphere. It is the book dependant in our college, I read books further than your hairs number, and can ask you a question you can’t answer it as far as you can live. I respect users here ,and didn’t be able to reply impolite message, if I didn’t sure I will reply nothing.
I respect the language I deal with , not to degrade its value, however, evey language has weak point even my language.
We came here to learn to follow the world, not to be by narrow soul , and not to diminish others rights, if you didn’t know this is your problem.

Hi Mohammad,

In the future, please select a meaningful title for your post. I’ve changed your title (which read ‘What you say?’) for you. For more information, please read this: What is a meaningful message title and why is it important?[YSaerTTEW443543]

TOEIC listening, photographs: Sending a message[YSaerTTEW443543]

Thank you dear Torseten , but the last reply by Beeesneees made me anger enough please tell him to read more and don’t opposes others by his littile information he had.

Well Mohammad, Bev is a woman and she is also one of our most active and resourceful language coaches here on the forum.[YSaerTTEW443543]

TOEIC listening, photographs: The receptionist[YSaerTTEW443543]

I’m sorry that my comments upset you, Mohammad, that was certainly not my intention. I am also sorry if you found my reply ‘impolite’, but I could equally answer that your unwillingness to believe me is just as impolite.
As a native speaker of English I was merely voicing my concerns that you are being misled by something and getting your information wrong as a result.
You drew conclusions and shared them on this forum. I know, as a native English speaker, that those conclusions are incorrect. Out of my own respect for the English language I hoped to persuade you of that fact, and to let others know that I did not think that what you said was correct.
I have no desire to dimish your rights. I do have a desire to ensure that you fully understand the English that you study. I don’t like to see anyone labouring under false beliefs and misinformation.

I’ve read enough and lived long enough to have gained information and experience in this matter. However, if it is your wish that I don’t try to help you understand, then I can assure you that this is the last that you will hear from me on the subject.

Hi Mohammad,

I am not going to read some book just because you recommend it.

In case you have not noticed I started my post by agreeing with you when you said that you have not produced something out of your pocket.
I wrote that I was taught the same thing. Meaning:

  • one can say either ‘‘the hunger of the lion’’ or ‘‘the lion’s hunger’’
  • one should say ‘‘the tail of the cat’’ (only) and never say ‘‘the cat’s tail’’ etc.

By the way, I doubt you could ever read more books than I have hairs on my head – I have a nice, very thick hair, and I get compliments on it all the time. :slight_smile:

Sorry that my post upset you…
…and I am considerate of other people’s feelings, thank you very much

Hello Cristina,

It really amazes me that you were taught such things. All I can say is that I have never heard of an English native speaker being expected to follow such rules.

Thank you for your acceptance of what I said. … ictionary/ … tv20.shtml … sives.html … tractions/

Dear mrs. teacher
I hope that you are reading totally message I have posted, firstly I have spoken about the genitive then I turned to gender and I have doing such error in writing that I mixed in first message between the genitive and the gender then in second message of this day I have mentioned clearly and I excused in second line I had written , then in any way you are teacher and I respect you , but keep on your mind what am said is the truth , didn’t you notice any book has mentioned such clauses or sentences , I admire again , didn’t you notice one word of that ? alas to understand my soul which is hard to blame.
Dear teacher :
I respect the language and it is a part of me it is a soul it is a breath.
Suppose you didn’t read all my comments , now I shall tell you there is difference between higher animals in grammar usage, but it is not generally permanent but it is known to all authors , the say ( she ) sometimes even for the cat in their speech or ship as I mentioned in the example of the message of this day but not for (ant ) at all , I didn’t undrestand why the not take the ant as animal rights in the language, my soul has wanted to defend this small insect rights , but the said ( he , she , who ) for the higher animal believe me.