@djsundog linguistically it's because cases where you might use ”it has" are actually like saying "it is" but in an indirect past-tense way (the "perfect tense"). like the classic "it's been" could be read as "it is been" and not even be entirely wrong. "is" and "to be" are just different verb forms of the same thing (identity). "has" is used syntactically rather than semantically, to form the perfect tense instead of to indicate possession.

@trwnh mmm, feel like "it is been" is as wrong as "it has be" personally, but not a hill I'd even fight on haha

@djsundog oh it's certainly wrong (or, well, as wrong as language can ever be wrong), but i'm saying that it has more to do with syntax (tenses and forms) than semantics (meaning). so "it's" fulfills the same role regardless of whether it expands to "it is" or "it has".

consider another example: "it has two legs". it sounds weird to say "it's two legs", right? this is because we're actually using a completely different sense of "has", as possession instead of as participle.

@trwnh I'm with ya, yeah

@djsundog thank you for indulging my linguistic nerdery