PSAT Glitch

[P2052 at AOL.COM]

I can remember a rule from traditional grammar, which stated that pronouns 
replace nouns, which, are, generally, in the nominative/accusative/dative 
case.  Possessive words, including nouns that end in apostrophe s, are in the 
genitive case.  Thus, according to traditional grammar, the sentence is 
incorrect since "Toni Morrison's" is 
genitive and clearly not a candidate for antecedent of the pronoun, "her."  
The problem, however, is that neither is the subject, "genius," which, in 
this context, does not share the semantic features of "her", which are 
[+human, +animate, +feminine].  Rather, "genius" (in this context) is 
referring to the "outstanding talent," "exceptional ability," or 
"intellectual or creative achievements," all characteristics, or skills.  

This rigid traditional definition works for sentences such as the following 
(borrowed from an exercise on pronouns):   "Our neighbor's lawnmower is very 
noisy.  This makes sleeping late impossible on Sunday mornings, when he 
mows."  In this example, "[t]his" refers to the noise; however, there is no 
explicit noun, "noise," only the predicate adjective, "noisy."   Also, as in 
the Toni Morrison example, the pronoun, "he," refers to the noun, "neighbor," 
but, again, there is only the possessive noun, "neighbor's."   Thus, the 
references are considered vague and must be corrected, probably as follows:  
"The noise from our neighbor's lawnmower makes sleeping late impossible on 
Sunday mornings, when [our neighbor] mows [his lawn]."

The problem with the traditional definition is that, while it might apply in 
most cases, there are exceptions.  For example, in the sentence in question, 
"Toni Morrison's genius enables her to create novels," traditional grammar 
would not even consider the discourse features of topic and theme.  Clearly, 
the general topic is Toni Morrison.  Moreover, logically, it is the only 
possible antecedent in this sentence (In a larger context, the antecedent 
might be more difficult to pinpoint) since it shares the semantic features of 
the pronoun, "her."   Thus, while traditional grammarians would declare the 
possessive, "Toni Morrison's," ineligible for replacement by the pronoun, 
modern grammars, particularly those that focus on discourse features and/or 
logical form, would find this construction acceptable, since the pronoun can 
replace the topic, "Toni Morrison."   "Middle-of-the-roaders" would argue 
that this error type is not even worth the bother.   Others might suggest 
that students revise the sentence to read, "Toni Morrison's genius [is what] 
enables Morrison to create novels" (which some might argue contains needless 
repetition) or "It is the genius of Toni Morrison that enables her to create 
novels" (which some might argue puts too much of a focus on the skill).  
Probably the best revision is the following: "It is sheer genius that enables 
Morrison to create [such + ADJ] novels."  

The bottom line, though, is that there is such a rule.  I've seen it in many 
of the older grammar books (The newer ones avoid the issue altogether.)  
However, because it seems clear that the antecedent is Toni Morrison--no 
matter which school of grammar the reader espouses--this error type would not 
be very high on my priority list.
                                                       P-A-T