I've reported this, but I think "schaar" should be alternatively translated as "pair of scissors."
It would also help people understand why we're using is here instead of zijn.
Remind me again why it is "van jou" and not "van jouw".
jouw = your
van jou = of you
van jouw [vader/moeder] = of your [father/mother]
So in this context, you can say the scissors are "of you", but saying "of your" would make no sense.
OK thanks. I figured it was something simple like that.
Jouw = your, van jou = yours
How do you know "van jou" means "yours" in this context and not "for you"?
For you= voor jou
How do you know "van jou" means "yours" here and not "for you"?