You can use 'he' for possessive noun. I remember of reading one of the Ron's post and tried to find out the same, but didn't get it.

This is a special case of the possessive pronoun case. I am not able to explain you but I can provide you the link if I find.

reply2spg wrote:You can use 'he' for possessive noun. I remember of reading one of the Ron's post and tried to find out the same, but didn't get it.

This is a special case of the possessive pronoun case. I am not able to explain you but I can provide you the link if I find.

Would be really helpful if you can find the link.

Ok so this is called as 'Possessive Poison rule'. I found below combinations from my notes

ALL other combinations --
(1) non-possessive noun, non-possessive pronoun;
(2) non-possessive noun, possessive pronoun;
(3) possessive noun, possessive pronoun.

Just google the same and you will get number of results from manhatten site. I am citing one below, please check.

https://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/aga ... t9229.html

kvcpk wrote:

reply2spg wrote:You can use 'he' for possessive noun. I remember of reading one of the Ron's post and tried to find out the same, but didn't get it.

This is a special case of the possessive pronoun case. I am not able to explain you but I can provide you the link if I find.

Would be really helpful if you can find the link.

reply2spg wrote:Ok so this is called as 'Possessive Poison rule'. I found below combinations from my notes

ALL other combinations --
(1) non-possessive noun, non-possessive pronoun;
(2) non-possessive noun, possessive pronoun;
(3) possessive noun, possessive pronoun.

Just google the same and you will get number of results from manhatten site. I am citing one below, please check.

https://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/aga ... t9229.html

kvcpk wrote:

reply2spg wrote:You can use 'he' for possessive noun. I remember of reading one of the Ron's post and tried to find out the same, but didn't get it.

This is a special case of the possessive pronoun case. I am not able to explain you but I can provide you the link if I find.

Would be really helpful if you can find the link.

The post says you can't use a NON-possessive pronoun to stand for a possessive noun.

But the right answer in my question does. Hence I think the question is wrong.
He according to me is not possessive.

Just search Ron's post you will get one

reply2spg wrote:Just search Ron's post you will get one

Please be more specific, because I have yet come across a post that says such usage is acceptable.

Ok let me search and provide you. I am not able to find the link. However, I found the one where it says that a possessive noun can't serve as the antecedent for a pronoun

Here is the link - https://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/phr ... t3889.html

I guess we need to request Ron to weigh in. Sorry for confusing you guys. If I get any link I will post the same.

uwhusky wrote:

reply2spg wrote:Just search Ron's post you will get one

Please be more specific, because I have yet come across a post that says such usage is acceptable.

kvcpk wrote:Napolean's early battle strategy focused mainly on infantry maneuvers, but supporting his riflemen with cavalry and artillery units.

A. but supporting
B. and had supported
C. but with supporting
D. although he supported
E. and even though supporting

[spoiler]Source: Grockit[/spoiler]

I picked D based on the following:
1. the sentence required contrast (as we are comparing two different techniques), so B and E are out
2.the first part has subject and verb, so to maintain parallelism,the second part should have the same form, so A and C are out
3. Only D remained. Even if D has the possessive pronoun problem, "he" clearly refers to Napoleon and the sentence's meaning is clear. It is definitely better than the rest, anyway..