http://www.englishforums.com/English/EslGeneralEnglishGrammar-Questions/Forum12.htmAsk your questions on grammar and get your sentence checked. We answer lots of different types of general English grammar questions here. <font color=red>DO NOT post paragraphs and compositions here. Post them in our <a href="http://www.englishforums.com/English/EssayReportCompositionWriting/Forum9.htm"><b>Essay, Report and Composition Writing Forum</b></a>.</font>enXMOD (Build: 3616.28671)http://www.englishforums.com/English/Plural/2/hxrnn/Post.htm#655266Tue, 27 Jan 2009 07:31:15 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:655266Palinkasocsi0http://www.englishforums.com/English/Plural/2/hxrnn/Post.htm#655266http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments12-655266.xmlThat&#39;s right, CalifJim. Thanks G.G. I especially like the quote-unquote thing. Clive: Palinkasocsihttp://www.englishforums.com/English/Plural/hxrnn/post.htm#654880Mon, 26 Jan 2009 22:06:34 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:654880Grammar Geek1http://www.englishforums.com/English/Plural/hxrnn/post.htm#654880http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments12-654880.xmlA habit I am trying desperately to break my daughter of! Recently I read a transcripted interview in which the subject repeated said things like &quot;native, well quote-unquote native dancers.&quot; So now the little finger-quote gesture is making its way into spoken speech. Palinosocsi, with the &quot;qutoation marks&quot; you need the plural.http://www.englishforums.com/English/Plural/hxrnn/post.htm#654800Mon, 26 Jan 2009 20:23:59 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:654800CalifJim2http://www.englishforums.com/English/Plural/hxrnn/post.htm#654800http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments12-654800.xmlthat are even mimed by hand gesture It just dawned on me that this refers to the gesture that people make to show quotation marks ( &quot; &quot; ) by raising their arms and moving two fingers of each hand, much as if they were holding rabbit puppets and making the rabbits&#39; ears wiggle! Right? CJhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/Plural/hxrnn/post.htm#654765Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:32:00 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:654765Clive3http://www.englishforums.com/English/Plural/hxrnn/post.htm#654765http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments12-654765.xmlHi, These lingists seem pretty cunning to me. Clivehttp://www.englishforums.com/English/Plural/hxrnn/post.htm#654760Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:30:36 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:654760Palinkasocsi4http://www.englishforums.com/English/Plural/hxrnn/post.htm#654760http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments12-654760.xmlWhat do you think: In writing sarcasm is made manifest in the form of quotation marks that is/are even mimed by hand gesture in speaking. is or are? P.http://www.englishforums.com/English/Plural/hxrnn/post.htm#654756Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:19:12 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:654756Palinkasocsi5http://www.englishforums.com/English/Plural/hxrnn/post.htm#654756http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments12-654756.xmlThe original sentence is: These separators are made manifest as explicit indices of quotation (that are even mimed by hand gesture), intonational misfits and hyperformality (for the details, see Haiman 1990, 1998). Don&#39;t worry, it absolutely makes sense for cognitive linguists. Next time I will try to reveal my concerns by paraphrasing my sentences with more care so that you can understand my problem better. Thanks for the answers. Palinkasocsihttp://www.englishforums.com/English/Plural/hxrnn/post.htm#653813Tue, 26 May 2009 08:09:45 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:653813Yankee6http://www.englishforums.com/English/Plural/hxrnn/post.htm#653813http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments12-653813.xmlPersonally, I think that&#39;s a sentence that more than just a few people might find worthy of being sarcastic about.http://www.englishforums.com/English/Plural/hxrnn/post.htm#653807Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:09:45 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:653807CalifJim7http://www.englishforums.com/English/Plural/hxrnn/post.htm#653807http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments12-653807.xmlWhich is better to use: the singular or the plural? I don&#39;t think it&#39;s wise to invent a new constituent for the sentence on the basis of your imaginings, so I don&#39;t believe the noun mimicry has anything to do with it. There are only two possible antecedents of that : indices (plural) and quotation (singular). So it&#39;s a matter of what the relative clause is about. Is it talking about indices that are even mimed by hand gesture? Or is it talking about quotation that is even mimed by hand gesture? Personally, I&#39;m drawing a total blank on what either of these things might mean. CJhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/Plural/hxrnn/post.htm#653699Tue, 26 May 2009 08:09:45 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:653699Clive8http://www.englishforums.com/English/Plural/hxrnn/post.htm#653699http://www.englishforums.com/English/comments12-653699.xmlHi, Look at the following: Sarcasm is made manifest as explicit indices of quotation (that is/are even mimed by hand gesture), intonational misfits, etc. My question is: Which is better to use: the singular or the plural? Plural, since &#39;that&#39; seems to refer to &#39;indices&#39;. Logic would opt for the plural but if we referred to mimicry itself as a (single) notion, then the singular would be better. The word &#39;mimicry&#39; is not mentioned here, and I see no suggestion that it is the subiect. I don&#39;t understand the meaning of the phrases explicit indices of quotation and intonational misfits . Clivehttp://www.englishforums.com/English/Plural/hxrnn/post.htmMon, 26 Jan 2009 09:09:45 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:653663Palinkasocsi9http://www.englishforums.com/English/Plural/hxrnn/post.htmhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/comments12-653663.xmlDear Forum Users, Look at the following: Sarcasm is made manifest as explicit indices of quotation (that is/are even mimed by hand gesture), intonational misfits, etc. My question is: Which is better to use: the singular or the plural? Logic would opt for the plural but if we referred to mimicry itself as a (single) notion, then the singular would be better. What do you natives think? Many thanks. Palinkasocsi