There are way to many versions of "it" for me to wrap my mind around.
Why we have "sit", but not "sin" before "vand"?
Because of the gender of "vand".:
Vand - et vand - vandet - sit vand.
Hund - en hund - hunden - sin hund.
So when its an et word we use "sit" but en words use "sin"? Sorry dumb question is dumb just wanted to make sure i was following right.
Correct; but only in the singular case. In the plural it is always "sine".
Shouldn't "katten drikker sit vand" and "katten drikker dens/dets vand" both be correct? Because the second means "the cat is drinking its (something else's) water," right?
Of course both should be right., since we don't have the context here.
"dens" is accepted now.
Yes, you're right, but in the context of this sentence by itself "it" has nothing else to refer to other than the cat. That's why "sit" is correct here.
That's what I thought, but I was told to mark all correct translations and I got confused (I'd quibble that I was actually right!)
So does the sin/sit have to agree with the subject (cat in this example) or with the object (water in this example)?
It has to agree with the object. I think you would say "Katten drikker sit vand" and "Katten drikker sin mælk".
What is comon and neuter
I believe common would be n-words (like pigen) and neuter is t-words (like vandet).
Gahhhhhh i eont understand this atall
Wasn't the rule that defines give plural adjectives? Why is it [sit] here istead of [sine]?
So if sit/sin have to agree with the object why does din/dit have to agree with the subject? I would think they all should modify the object.