a "group question"

Vocaboly.com
Vocabulary builder software for SAT, TOEFL, GRE, GMAT and more

FAQ

Memberlist

Profile

a "group question"
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

Vocaboly.com Forum Index -> alt.usage.english

Author

Message

TakenEvent
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 2:39 am Post subject: Re: a "group question"

"Harvey Van Sickle" <harvey.news@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9706BB82CBBC7whhvans@80.5.182.99...

Quote:

I can certainly appreciate that in theory.

Quote:

It's like the conventions as to when one can use the word "gotten"
and when one can't: the usage is entirely natural to a North
American, but the word is not used in BrEng (and thus the
conventions of its use are a mystery).

For starters, don't focus on the word itself. It is perhaps the only word
in the English language that can seem ungrammatical without any context
whatsoever. In use, though, it seems fine.

I've gotten used to it.

See?

Quote:

For what it's worth, if you don't like "the government are
planning", here's a Scottish document that should curdle the milk
on your coco puffs: it includes "the government seek", "the
government do not believe", "the way in which the government
ensure", and a bunch of other plurals. Enjoy:
http://www.archive.official-
documents.co.uk/document/scottish/ksmoving/ch5.htm

Painful.

Maybe it's just a way for members of the government to not feel so
individually responsible when things go wrong or are simply not appreciated
by the people.

Arne H. Wilstrup
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 2:42 am Post subject: Re: a "group question"

"TakenEvent" <lightbulbsnickety@chartermi.net> skrev i en
meddelelse news:sRsbf.9891$7s1.4505@fe04.lga...

Quote:

I had to prove it right by showing him the song: If you
were
the only girl in the world and I were the only boy"

I would caution you against trying to learn proper English
from music,
though. Lyricists are notorious for their liberal use of
poetic license.

you are right again, but the betting was about whether you
could say it or not - and I have been told that it is
correct to say I were in subjunctive, so... Smile

Quote:

So sometimes a real amateur as I can see something that
native speakers do not know -but I must admit that this
is
extremely seldom.

You're probably better tutored in the fundamentals than
most native
speakers, who don't learn it as a logical process, but as
however it is
their parents speak. I'd bet than 95% of Americans
couldn't even define
"subjunctive."

Probably - but I am not saying this to show off - I am just
trying to be better in your language - at any cost Smile

and
I'm improving every day, I hope

--
Arne H.Wilstrup
>

TakenEvent
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 2:44 am Post subject: Re: a "group question"

"Arne H. Wilstrup" <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> wrote in message
news:436e5a66$0$84039$edfadb0f@dtext01.news.tele.dk...

Quote:

"TakenEvent" <lightbulbsnickety@chartermi.net> skrev i en
meddelelse news:ZHsbf.9887$7s1.5399@fe04.lga...
I go..."

it is the institution The
Government, which consits of serveral members and it is
these members who are planning new tax increases.

You even said it yourself: "...it is the institution..."'

Yes, but it has nothing to do with the example

You'd do better to stick with the Omrud and Harvey on this
one. Around
here, anything to do with taxes is blamed solely on the
President,
regardless of the involvement of elected representatives.

probably, but in UK you can say what I wrote. Cf. ALD

Not to be critical, but you should consider running a
spelling check on your
posts. You have a lot of typos. Also, a brief glance
would catch things
like "They landed gentry..." I'm sure you meant "The."

you are right - but I do not use a spelling check here, as I
write directly to the news group. I am quite aware of my
lousy English, and I am grateful for every reminder of my
spelling mistakes or grammatical errors, but when I write in
this group, I must admit that I am often too lazy to be very
fuzzy about it. But I shall take your remarks into
consideration, so thank you for reminding me.

Okay, try "...to be very fussy..." "Fuzzy" would mean "unclear" in this
context -- the opposite of your intent.

Quote:

I don't say that it is alway so, but I just say that the
sentence of the Government is absolutely correct
according
to ALD and my grammar. :-)

It may be a habit of the people, and it may even be
accepted practice where
you live, but I think it's fundamentally flawed.

Well, Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary is THE world's
authority on the English language, but I am open to another
opinion :-)

Well, it's your part of the world's authority...

Quote:

Would you recommend another? Smile

))

I would, but nobody's English is universally accepted.

Tony Cooper
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 2:49 am Post subject: Re: a "group question"

On Sun, 6 Nov 2005 20:32:43 +0100, "Arne H. Wilstrup"
<detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> wrote:

Quote:

you are right - but I do not use a spelling check here, as I
write directly to the news group. I am quite aware of my
lousy English, and I am grateful for every reminder of my
spelling mistakes or grammatical errors, but when I write in
this group, I must admit that I am often too lazy to be very
fuzzy about it. But I shall take your remarks into
consideration, so thank you for reminding me.

When I write in this group I'm often fuzzy, but not because I'm lazy.

--

Tony Cooper
Orlando, FL

TakenEvent
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 2:51 am Post subject: Re: a "group question"

"Arne H. Wilstrup" <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> wrote in message
news:436e5cc1$0$84026$edfadb0f@dtext01.news.tele.dk...

Quote:

"TakenEvent" <lightbulbsnickety@chartermi.net> skrev i en
meddelelse news:sRsbf.9891$7s1.4505@fe04.lga...
I had to prove it right by showing him the song: If you
were
the only girl in the world and I were the only boy"

I would caution you against trying to learn proper English
from music,
though. Lyricists are notorious for their liberal use of
poetic license.

you are right again, but the betting was about whether you
could say it or not - and I have been told that it is
correct to say I were in subjunctive, so... :-)

So sometimes a real amateur as I can see something that
native speakers do not know -but I must admit that this
is
extremely seldom.

You're probably better tutored in the fundamentals than
most native
speakers, who don't learn it as a logical process, but as
however it is
their parents speak. I'd bet than 95% of Americans
couldn't even define
"subjunctive."

Probably - but I am not saying this to show off - I am just
trying to be better in your language - at any cost Smile

and
I'm improving every day, I hope

You've certainly picked the wrong crowd if you did want to show off your
language skills. These people are insane with the finer points of grammar
and crazy with OED references. I bet someone here could tell you the page
number on which to find "however" -- by memory.

"I were" does sound awkward out of context. I'll bet your buddy didn't even
realize he was already familiar with it.

the Omrud
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 2:58 am Post subject: Re: a "group question"

Arne H. Wilstrup <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> spake thusly:

Quote:

"the Omrud" <usenet.omrud@gmail.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:MPG.1dd85fb5e58d191398a207@news.ntlworld.com...
"I were feeling a bit ill yesterday."

subjunctive?

Nope. Perfectly normal and straightforward past tense in Northern
England, if a little informal.

--
David
=====
replace usenet with the

Paul Wolff
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 3:22 am Post subject: Re: a "group question"

In message <bIrbf.1302$bS5.517@fe02.lga>, TakenEvent
<lightbulbsnickety@chartermi.net> writes

Quote:

"Arne H. Wilstrup" <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> wrote in message
news:436e3e51$0$84014$edfadb0f@dtext01.news.tele.dk...

But still, you can hear: The Government are planning new tax
increases.

Harvey says that's normal. I think it sounds, as Harvey put it, what was
it..."deeply illiterate." Is it just laziness spawning such weirdness?
Nothing wrong with it, as long as people go with it, I guess.

If it helps, remember that our current British government seldom speaks

with one voice. Leaks, briefings and counter-briefings abound.
Whatever *they* plan is the outcome of negotiations and putative
agreement.
--
Paul
In bocca al Lupo!

Paul Wolff
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 3:29 am Post subject: Re: a "group question"

In message <Xns9706BB82CBBC7whhvans@80.5.182.99>, Harvey Van Sickle
<harvey.news@ntlworld.com> writes

Quote:

On 06 Nov 2005, TakenEvent wrote
"Arne H. Wilstrup" <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> wrote in
message news:436e3e51$0$84014$edfadb0f@dtext01.news.tele.dk...

But still, you can hear: The Government are planning new tax
increases.

Harvey says that's normal. I think it sounds, as Harvey put
it, what was it..."deeply illiterate." Is it just laziness
spawning such weirdness? Nothing wrong with it, as long as
people go with it, I guess.

I don't think it's laziness at all: it's just an illustration --
and to a North American probably the most dissonant example -- of
different forms of English developing different grammatical
conventions.

It's like the conventions as to when one can use the word "gotten"
and when one can't: the usage is entirely natural to a North
American, but the word is not used in BrEng (and thus the
conventions of its use are a mystery).

For what it's worth, if you don't like "the government are
planning", here's a Scottish document that should curdle the milk
on your coco puffs: it includes "the government seek", "the
government do not believe", "the way in which the government
ensure", and a bunch of other plurals. Enjoy:
http://www.archive.official-
documents.co.uk/document/scottish/ksmoving/ch5.htm

There's a recent tendency for ministerial officials to drop the definite

article: "Government plans to... " Pending research, this form may
demand a singular verb. Perhaps *they* even adopted it to mask internal
dissension. I have taken it to have originated as an infection from
Labour Party Conference jargon: "Conference resolves ..."
--
Paul
In bocca al Lupo!

Maria Conlon
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 3:45 am Post subject: Re: a "group question"

TakenEvent wrote:

Quote:

Arne H. Wilstrup wrote in message

You can either say "the family is" or "the family are"
according to how you consider the familiy: as a group of
people or as individual members of the group.

"Family" is singular.
The whole family is going to be there.
Many families are going to be there.

But how about : a group of men? is this "a group of men are
sitting" or is it "a group of men is sitting "according to
the situation above (family)?

The group is...
The groups are...

And moreover: you say The children or the teacher is ..." as
the sentence with "or" demands that you take the latest noun
in consideration, but how about

The children are...
The teacher is...

the children and the teacher -- is this "the children and
the teacher is" or is it "the children and the teacher are"?

Are, are, are.

Agree, agree, agree.

Maria Conlon, resident of southeast Michigan, near Detroit.

Robert Lieblich
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 3:51 am Post subject: Re: a "group question"

TakenEvent wrote:

[ ... ]

Quote:

Does it make sense to include the punctuation in the quotation marks in the
following sentence?

Would you say "The dogs is in the house?"

First, I would say either "The dog is ..." or "The dogs are ..."

More important, you've set up a straw man. You're criticizing a form
that would occur only if someone made an error. The American practice
with respect to question marks and exclamation marks is the same as
the British -- inside the quotation marks if part of what is quoted,
otherwise not.

Quote:

It could if the sentence in quotations was a question, but if the writer
wanted it to be known that it was a statement, how can it be punctuated to
serve that end?

Would you say "The dogs is in the house"?

Standard British practice. Standard American practice.

Quote:

That's better, but still somewhat ambiguous. Perhaps I just don't give
people enough credit.

You don't give people enough credit. (I'd like to borrow a half
million dollars or so.) It's not ambiguous.

Quote:

Would you say "The dogs is in the house."?

The double punctuation is bizarre, but it isn't something to which people
couldn't adapt.

I'm sure people could adapt to it, but there's no reason to do so.

Just to make sure -- here's the American form: Would you say "The dog
is in the house"?

Next question.

Quote:

Of course, a writer could resort to rewriting, but that can get verbose and
appear confusing.

Would you make the statement, "The dogs is in the house?"

That doesn't *look* like a statement...

And nobody knowledgeable about either American or British punctuation
would punctuate it that way.

Did I mention that "The dogs is ..." is neither grammatical nor
idiomatic?

--
Bob Lieblich
Who has the question, if not the answer.

Maria Conlon
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 4:03 am Post subject: Re: a "group question"

TakenEvent wrote, in part:

Quote:

...."Chelsea is unbeatable" sounds better, in the
same way that "The Lions is playing tonight" sounds awful, where "the
Lions" is a football team. It isn't uncommon to hear "Detroit are
going to lose again," but seeing it in print invites a cringe.

The Lions *are* playing.
Detroit *is* going to lose again.

That's the usage I hear. (It's also sort of a theorem: The Lions are
playing, therefore Detroit is going to lose again.)

BTW, I can't remember ever hearing "Detroit are." Maybe "the Detroits
are" -- when the team is called "the Detroits" (which I think the
forerunners of the Detroit Tigers were indeed called, and which some
announcers call the Tigers even now).

--
Maria Conlon

Harvey Van Sickle
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 4:13 am Post subject: Re: a "group question"

On 06 Nov 2005, Maria Conlon wrote

Quote:

TakenEvent wrote, in part:

...."Chelsea is unbeatable" sounds better, in the
same way that "The Lions is playing tonight" sounds awful,
where "the Lions" is a football team. It isn't uncommon to
hear "Detroit are going to lose again," but seeing it in
print invites a cringe.

The Lions *are* playing.
Detroit *is* going to lose again.

That's the usage I hear. (It's also sort of a theorem: The
Lions are playing, therefore Detroit is going to lose again.)

BTW, I can't remember ever hearing "Detroit are."

That's certainly what I would have expected from in AmEng: I was
quite surprised to see someone who is apparently using AmEng say
that "Detroit are" is "not uncommon", as I'd have thought that "the
[singular team name] are" is ungrammatical in AmEng.

It became clear in the course of the thread, though, that the OP
was querying BrEng practice, where it's not only grammatical but, I
suspect, the most frequently-encountered construction.

--
Cheers, Harvey
Canadian (30 years) and British (23 years)
For e-mail, change harvey.news to harvey.van

TakenEvent
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 4:14 am Post subject: Re: a "group question"

"Robert Lieblich" <robert.lieblich@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:436E6CCA.3EBA0FF4@verizon.net...

Quote:

TakenEvent wrote:

[ ... ]

Does it make sense to include the punctuation in the quotation marks in
the
following sentence?

Would you say "The dogs is in the house?"

First, I would say either "The dog is ..." or "The dogs are ..."

More important, you've set up a straw man. You're criticizing a form
that would occur only if someone made an error. The American practice
with respect to question marks and exclamation marks is the same as
the British -- inside the quotation marks if part of what is quoted,
otherwise not.

I thought the British routinely placed punctuation outside of quotation
marks. Not so for dialogue and quotes, huh?

Quote:

It could if the sentence in quotations was a question, but if the writer
wanted it to be known that it was a statement, how can it be punctuated
to
serve that end?

Would you say "The dogs is in the house"?

Standard British practice. Standard American practice.

Quote:

That's better, but still somewhat ambiguous. Perhaps I just don't give
people enough credit.

You don't give people enough credit. (I'd like to borrow a half
million dollars or so.) It's not ambiguous.

Would you say "The dogs is in the house."?

The double punctuation is bizarre, but it isn't something to which
people
couldn't adapt.

I'm sure people could adapt to it, but there's no reason to do so.

Just to make sure -- here's the American form: Would you say "The dog
is in the house"?

Okay. I just learned something. Or re-learned something. I guess I've
never seen an American usage where the quotes didn't encompass the other
punctuation. You're right, though; American usage does require the
placement of exclamation points and questions marks which are not part of
the quote to be outside of the quotation marks. The same is true for colons
and semi-colons.

Is it a matter of preference whether or not to include a comma after 'say'?

Quote:

Next question.

Of course, a writer could resort to rewriting, but that can get verbose
and
appear confusing.

Would you make the statement, "The dogs is in the house?"

That doesn't *look* like a statement...

And nobody knowledgeable about either American or British punctuation
would punctuate it that way.

That's a relief.

Quote:

Did I mention that "The dogs is ..." is neither grammatical nor
idiomatic?

Of course it isn't, which is the point of the sentence (paraphrased from its
original context). You snipped the bit about commas, though. I'd really
like to see something done about that.

TakenEvent
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 4:28 am Post subject: Re: a "group question"

"Maria Conlon" <maria.c-b@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:%cubf.4314$Lv.685@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net...

Quote:

Exactly.

Quote:

Detroit *is* going to lose again.

Of course you're right in the strict American grammatical sense, but this is
a matter of what people say. Not all of the people all of the time, but
enough that I've noticed it. Try this example instead:

"What's the score?"
"Detroit are down 21-7."

I'm sure you've heard something similar to that. Apparently it's par for
the course in Britain.

Quote:

That's the usage I hear. (It's also sort of a theorem: The Lions are
playing, therefore Detroit is going to lose again.)

BTW, I can't remember ever hearing "Detroit are." Maybe "the Detroits
are" -- when the team is called "the Detroits" (which I think the
forerunners of the Detroit Tigers were indeed called, and which some
announcers call the Tigers even now).

I'm not familiar with "the Detroits" as a reference to the Tigers. I
haven't really followed professional baseball or football since 1987. I
watch the Lions every Thanksgiving, that's about it.

Harvey Van Sickle
Guest

Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 4:34 am Post subject: Re: a "group question"

On 06 Nov 2005, TakenEvent wrote

Quote:

I thought the British routinely placed punctuation outside of
quotation marks. Not so for dialogue and quotes, huh?

Dialogue is a special case, but for quotes it depends whether the
punctuation belongs to the quote or to the sentence which contains
the quote.

It differs primarily with less strong punctuation than question
marks. I believe -- Bob and others can correct me if I'm wrong --
that standard American punctuation could produce:

We will discuss American English "as she is spoke."

Whereas BrEng would see:

We will discuss American English "as she is spoke".

--
Cheers, Harvey
Canadian (30 years) and British (23 years)
For e-mail, change harvey.news to harvey.van

	Vocaboly.com Forum Index -> alt.usage.english	All times are GMT + 1 Hour Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next
Page 5 of 7

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Office Forum Access Forum Electronics Windows Server Exchange Server
New Topics Powered by phpBB