| Author |
Message |
iando
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 8:07 am
Post subject: Do English-native always determine singular/plural? |
|
|
The English language is considered to be a language in which any composition
cannot be made without determining (grammatical) singular/plural of nouns.
When they speak a noun,for example "apple","water", they have to usually
descriminate (semantic and syntactical) singular/plural - an apple or
apples, water - of the object indicated by the noun.
But do they really always determine semantic singular/plural though I think
they always determine the syntactical singular/plural?
What about the following cases?
An apple a day keeps the doctor away.
"The doctor" is grammatical singular.
I would like to go the cinema tomorrow
"the cinema" is grammatical singular..
In the above cases "the doctor" and "the cinema" CAN be one OR MORE
semantically?
Could anyone explain this?
Thanks
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Raymond S. Wise
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 8:07 am
Post subject: Re: Do English-native always determine singular/plural? |
|
|
iando wrote:
| Quote: | The English language is considered to be a language in which any composition
cannot be made without determining (grammatical) singular/plural of nouns.
When they speak a noun,for example "apple","water", they have to usually
descriminate (semantic and syntactical) singular/plural - an apple or
apples, water - of the object indicated by the noun.
But do they really always determine semantic singular/plural though I think
they always determine the syntactical singular/plural?
What about the following cases?
An apple a day keeps the doctor away.
"The doctor" is grammatical singular.
I would like to go the cinema tomorrow
"the cinema" is grammatical singular..
In the above cases "the doctor" and "the cinema" CAN be one OR MORE
semantically?
Could anyone explain this?
Thanks
|
In "An apple a day keeps the doctor away," the subject of "keeps" is
the phrase "an apple a day." which takes a singular verb. In the film
*Mary Poppins* there's a similar construction: "Just a spoonful of
sugar helps the medicine go down[....]"
As for "I would like to go TO the cinema tomorrow" (note the addition),
nothing in the sentence would change if "cinema" were replaced by a
plural noun, which it is, in fact, in the American English translation
of the sentence: "I would like to go to the movies tomorrow."
--
Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Donna Richoux
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 5:01 pm
Post subject: Re: Do English-native always determine singular/plural? |
|
|
iando <iando@abox.so-net.ne.jp> wrote:
| Quote: | The English language is considered to be a language in which any composition
cannot be made without determining (grammatical) singular/plural of nouns.
When they speak a noun,for example "apple","water", they have to usually
descriminate (semantic and syntactical) singular/plural - an apple or
apples, water - of the object indicated by the noun.
But do they really always determine semantic singular/plural though I think
they always determine the syntactical singular/plural?
What about the following cases?
An apple a day keeps the doctor away.
"The doctor" is grammatical singular.
I would like to go the cinema tomorrow
"the cinema" is grammatical singular..
In the above cases "the doctor" and "the cinema" CAN be one OR MORE
semantically?
Could anyone explain this?
|
The root of the expression "the doctor" must be that, traditionally,
everyone saw one doctor. In many cases, there was only one doctor in the
area. Even in a city, one had a "family doctor," what is called now "a
primary care physician." Nowadays, with clinics and specialists, this is
not so true, but we still speak of going to "the doctor" in the same
unspecified way we might speak of going to "the hospital."
With "cinema," why would a person plan to go to more than one cinema?
It's the movie theater.
--
Best -- Donna Richoux
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iando
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 8:53 pm
Post subject: Re: Do English-native always determine singular/plural? |
|
|
"Donna Richoux" wrote:
| Quote: | iando wrote:
The English language is considered to be a language in which any
composition
cannot be made without determining (grammatical) singular/plural of
nouns.
When they speak a noun,for example "apple","water", they have to usually
descriminate (semantic and syntactical) singular/plural - an apple or
apples, water - of the object indicated by the noun.
But do they really always determine semantic singular/plural though I
think
they always determine the syntactical singular/plural?
What about the following cases?
An apple a day keeps the doctor away.
"The doctor" is grammatical singular.
I would like to go the cinema tomorrow
"the cinema" is grammatical singular..
In the above cases "the doctor" and "the cinema" CAN be one OR MORE
semantically?
Could anyone explain this?
The root of the expression "the doctor" must be that, traditionally,
everyone saw one doctor. In many cases, there was only one doctor in the
area. Even in a city, one had a "family doctor," what is called now "a
primary care physician." Nowadays, with clinics and specialists, this is
not so true, but we still speak of going to "the doctor" in the same
unspecified way we might speak of going to "the hospital."
With "cinema," why would a person plan to go to more than one cinema?
It's the movie theater.
--
Best -- Donna Richoux
|
Thank you for interest.
When you speak the following sentence, which do English-native have in mind
as for acoustics, singular or plural semantically, not syntactically?
The acoustics in this hall are not too bad. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Donna Richoux
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 9:42 pm
Post subject: Re: Do English-native always determine singular/plural? |
|
|
iando <iando@abox.so-net.ne.jp> wrote:
| Quote: |
Thank you for interest.
When you speak the following sentence, which do English-native have in mind
as for acoustics, singular or plural semantically, not syntactically?
The acoustics in this hall are not too bad.
|
I myself picture sound waves bouncing off of walls and around corners,
but I doubt everyone does. Maybe they think "the collection of features
that lead to good sound quality."
Maybe they don't picture anything, and just think of it as one of those
words whose last letter is S and which usually (but not always) is
treated like a plural.
--
Best -- Donna Richoux |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Lyle
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 9:48 pm
Post subject: Re: Do English-native always determine singular/plural? |
|
|
Donna Richoux wrote:
[...]
| Quote: | With "cinema," why would a person plan to go to more than one
cinema?
It's the movie theater.
|
To see two films in two places. "I went to the cinema twice
yesterday: I saw X at the Odeon, then I went to the Essoldo for Y in
the evening."
BrE admits, but doesn't popularly use, "theatre" for the place: a
"cinema" is what the public calls it, as "theatre" would be
understood to mean "live theatre". The owners of cinemas tend to use
"theatre", though.
--
Mike. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 10:25 pm
Post subject: Re: Do English-native always determine singular/plural? |
|
|
iando wrote:
| Quote: | Thank you for interest.
When you speak the following sentence, which do English-native have in mind
as for acoustics, singular or plural semantically, not syntactically?
The acoustics in this hall are not too bad.
|
Semantically, 'acoustics' is singular. We cannot say, "The acoustics in
this hall are not too bad, except for that one acoustic over there." A
similar thing happens with "pants", which is semantically singular but
grammatically plural.
Interestingly, terms that are grammatically plural / semantically
singular in everyday discourse often become grammatically singular in
specialist jargon. My wife, in the fashion business, refers to "a
pant". I've heard this with other words as well, though I can't think
of any. It wouldn't surprise me if an acoustics specialist could say,
"There's an acoustic here that I don't like."
All that said, the use of plural forms (and the use of
definite/indefinite forms, such as "I went to the hospital" (USA)
versus "I went to hospital" (Canada & UK), or "the tiger is a vicious
beast" when we mean all tigers as a group, not a specific tiger) can
sometimes be idiomatic in English. Probably in most other languages as
well.
---larry |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Lyle
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 10:55 pm
Post subject: Re: Do English-native always determine singular/plural? |
|
|
larrysulky@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
| Quote: | Semantically, 'acoustics' is singular. We cannot say, "The
acoustics
in this hall are not too bad, except for that one acoustic over
there." A similar thing happens with "pants", which is semantically
singular but grammatically plural.
|
I don't think so, and Collins dictionary seems to agree with me. I
would say "The acoustics are"...
[...]
| Quote: | of any. It wouldn't surprise me if an acoustics specialist could
say,
"There's an acoustic here that I don't like."
|
....but I would very often, perhaps more often, say "The acoustic is".
Considered as a subject, though, it'd be "Acoustics is", as with
"Physics".
--
Mike. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Duncanson
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 12:31 am
Post subject: Re: Do English-native always determine singular/plural? |
|
|
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 14:48:04 -0000, "Mike Lyle"
<mike_lyle_uk@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote:
| Quote: | Donna Richoux wrote:
[...]
With "cinema," why would a person plan to go to more than one
cinema?
It's the movie theater.
To see two films in two places. "I went to the cinema twice
yesterday: I saw X at the Odeon, then I went to the Essoldo for Y in
the evening."
BrE admits, but doesn't popularly use, "theatre" for the place: a
"cinema" is what the public calls it, as "theatre" would be
understood to mean "live theatre". The owners of cinemas tend to use
"theatre", though.
|
In BrE there is a tendency to call an art-house type cinema a "film
theatre": National Film Theatre, Reading FT, Glasgow FT, Southampton
FT, Queen's FT (Belfast), and others.
--
Peter Duncanson
UK (posting from a.u.e) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Lyle
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 12:43 am
Post subject: Re: Do English-native always determine singular/plural? |
|
|
Peter Duncanson wrote:
| Quote: | On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 14:48:04 -0000, "Mike Lyle"
[...]
BrE admits, but doesn't popularly use, "theatre" for the place: a
"cinema" is what the public calls it, as "theatre" would be
understood to mean "live theatre". The owners of cinemas tend to
use
"theatre", though.
In BrE there is a tendency to call an art-house type cinema a "film
theatre": National Film Theatre, Reading FT, Glasgow FT,
Southampton
FT, Queen's FT (Belfast), and others.
|
True: I'd forgotten that.
--
Mike. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
R H Draney
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 12:54 am
Post subject: Re: Do English-native always determine singular/plural? |
|
|
Mike Lyle filted:
| Quote: |
larrysulky@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think so, and Collins dictionary seems to agree with me. I
would say "The acoustics are"...
[...]
of any. It wouldn't surprise me if an acoustics specialist could
say,
"There's an acoustic here that I don't like."
...but I would very often, perhaps more often, say "The acoustic is".
|
I might as well, but not in the same context:
"All these electric guitars are fine, but the acoustic is out of tune."
.....r |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ray Heindl
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 6:01 am
Post subject: Re: Do English-native always determine singular/plural? |
|
|
"Mike Lyle" <mike_lyle_uk@REMOVETHISyahoo.co.uk> wrote:
| Quote: | larrysulky@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
Semantically, 'acoustics' is singular. We cannot say, "The
acoustics
in this hall are not too bad, except for that one acoustic over
there." A similar thing happens with "pants", which is semantically
singular but grammatically plural.
I don't think so, and Collins dictionary seems to agree with me. I
would say "The acoustics are"...
|
The RHUD also agrees with you. Confusion may stem from the other
meaning of "acoustics", a branch of physics, in which it *is* singular.
--
Ray Heindl
(remove the Xs to reply) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in