If you still have a doubt you can see Michael swan page no 296.
It will be really great if I could attach the pic of that page.
It will be really great if I could attach the pic of that page.
You don't need to attach a picture. I know what he says, and generally he is wrong!
Let me tell you about this:
Modern usage manuals generally do not condemn non-genitives altogether, though they vary in their tolerance of them.
As I said before, it's a matter of style, formal genitive, informal accusative.
PaulM
Mr. Paul don't make it an issue of prestige.We are discussing here as to get the solutions which are grammatically correct.
And Informal ways are not grammatically correct.
Informal way of English can be used to talk only. But in exams and written form one have to follow the grammar rules and not supposed to be informal.
Some examples...
It's me. (Wrong)
(Informal way. You can hear it very frequently. But it's grammatically incorrect)
It's I. (Correct and will not cause me loss of marks too in the exam)
My hairs are black/brown/white. (You can hear that too. But grammatically not correct.)
My hair is black.(correct, as hair is an uncountable noun.)
Where is my pants ? ( you might use the same. But grammatically incorrect 
)
Where are my pants ? ( Correct, as pants, spectacles, tongs etc are always plural.)
So Mr. Paul it is not necessary that what you hear frequently must be correct.
And Informal ways are not grammatically correct.
THAT IS NONSENSE. INFORMAL CONSTRUCTIONS ARE NPRMALLY QUITE GRAMMATICAL !!!
Informal way of English can be used to talk only. But in exams and written form one have to follow the grammar rules and not supposed to be informal.
Some examples...
It's me. (Wrong)
(Informal way. You can hear it very frequently. But it's grammatically incorrect)
It's I. (Correct and will not cause me loss of marks too in the exam)
Again, nonsense !! "It's I" is pompous and pedantic. "It's me" is perfectly acceptable at all levels.
My hairs are black/brown/white. (You can hear that too. But grammatically not correct.)
You do not hear that. NO ONE says that !!
My hair is black.(correct, as hair is an uncountable noun.)
Where is my pants ? ( you might use the same. But grammatically incorrect
)You do not hear that. NO ONE says that !!
Where are my pants ? ( Correct, as pants, spectacles, tongs etc are always plural.)
So Mr. Paul it is not necessary that what you hear frequently must be correct.
Do not teach me my own language. I am an English teacher and you are a student! Whoever told you that informal ways are ungrammatical is WRONG. Now take that on board, okay?
And how I answer questions to the original questioner, "Tina" is not for you to contradict.
I suggest you find a new school or a new teacher who actually knows something about English grammar.
Incidentally, If you think you know it all, why are you wasting my time asking questions on this site?
PaulM
Respected teacher _/_
First :- I haven't asked a single question on this forum.
Second :- If you are a teacher then it really worths concern who made you teacher And I am surprised how you cleared the examination for eligibility. (May be by sc/st/obc quota. I don't want to ask which one is yours)
Third : A good teacher is always a good learner. So I am telling you good things so you should learn them by heart (Aaahhhhh...may be this should have made this sentence past tense according to you. So that the future of the poor boys in your hand can be assured safe.
Advice :- Don't think yourself superior to all. You say that "Michael Swan" is wrong but you are right really makes me laugh.
"Michael Swan's book "English practical usage (Oxford publication)" is used as a reference all over the world.
So read it by heart.
One more book that might be helpful for you is "J.C.Nesfield's English grammar composition an usage"
Note :- English is not a scientific subject so that you can invent a new rule in your laboratory and it will be valid round the world.
Here you have to follow the rules of scholars.
First :- I haven't asked a single question on this forum.
Second :- If you are a teacher then it really worths concern who made you teacher And I am surprised how you cleared the examination for eligibility. (May be by sc/st/obc quota. I don't want to ask which one is yours)
What are you talking about? I teach grammar privately to college students. I have a university degree in English, and I own a language school in Turkey. You are a beginner with a relatively poor understanding of English, but I do hope you can improve.
Third : A good teacher is always a good learner. So I am telling you good things so you should learn them by heart (Aaahhhhh...may be this should have made this sentence past tense according to you. So that the future of the poor boys in your hand can be assured safe.
I do not recommend leaning out-of-date prescriptive nonsense of the sort put forward by clueless writers of usage manuals
Advice :- Don't think yourself superior to all. You say that "Michael Swan" is wrong but you are right really makes me laugh.
"Michael Swan's book "English practical usage (Oxford publication)" is used as a reference all over the world. So read it by heart.
But not by scholarly linguists and grammarians. It's a very basic book full of old-fashioned prescriptivisms and NOT held in high esteem by college/university lingustic students.
I suggest you read what Swan says about himself: "I feel bound to confess that, as I drifted into English language teaching and applied linguistics with no professional training in these areas, I have no qualifications whatever for the work that I do. If I applied to myself for a job as a research assistant, I would have to turn myself down".
One more book that might be helpful for you is "J.C.Nesfield's English grammar composition an usage".
That book was first published in 1898! Our knowledge of English grammar has advanced enormously since then. Would you like to be operated on by a surgeon who uses techniques that are over 100 years old?]
Note :- English is not a scientific subject so that you can invent a new rule in your laboratory and it will be valid round the world.
Here you have to follow the rules of scholars.
[ Modern grammar takes account of developments in the way we understand and analyse our language. I subscribe to descriptivism not the kind of prescriptivism that authors like Swan churn out. If you want to read cutting-edge grammar, I suggest you buy "A Student's Introduction to English Grammar", by Huddleston & Pullum (ISBN 978-0-521-61288-3).
I'm sorry, but I cannot help you any further.
PaulM