Search results for 'tag:Essays tag:Singular verbs' matching tags 'Essays' and 'Singular verbs'

Re: Cosmetic Surgery

AlpheccaStars — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 16:29:01 GMT

Dear anon:

You have a problem with structuring sentences with a clear subject and verb. To fix this problem, try to write a lot of very simple sentences first. (one subject - one verb)

Once you have the ideas clearly stated in simple sentences, you can combine them into more complex sentences. Be careful to keep the correct structure when you combine them. Avoid run-on sentences. In particular, the fourth paragraph is one very long sentence that is very hard to read. Break this up into several sentences, each with a single point.

Another problem I see is that your verbs frequently do not agree with their subjects, especially in 3rd person singular. Remember that the present tense verb has the ending -s in third person singular.

I did not make all the corrections, but just gave some suggestions as a start.

Anonymous
~~The~~ Cosmetic surgery nowadays ( move this word to the beginning of the sentence) is increasing (use the progressive tense) ~~ncreases~~ a lot in each country around the world. ~~in generally when?~~ (you have already answered when -with 'nowadays') And how? (Why?) These are good questions to answer. Letâs try to find the right reason to explain those questions.
(This paragraph does not answer WHEN plastic surgery is increasing, but WHY: more older women are electing to have it - they see one day that their former beauty is gone.)

To begin with, Iâll try to answer the question WHEN? Focusing on women ~~I guess~~ (informal) when they look at themselves in at the mirror and see how the time past looks (I don't understand how time past can look old and ugly; aren't you talking about the women looking old?) old, fat, and ugly; they start to thinking about in something to solve this big inconvenience and HOW? With a plastic surgery, cosmetic surgery, liposuction and all those stuff (very informal) , to be more skinny and look less old and change some parts of their faces or body that they donât like. (this sentence needs to be rewritten, it does not have proper subject-verb structure. Here is an example: Liposuction can reduce their fat, and make them look slimmer; cosmetic surgery can reshape the nose and improve their appearance, and plastic surgery can tighten sagging skin that causes unsightly bags and wrinkles.)

Another major reason are (reason is singular, and needs a singular verb) that ~~what~~ the society demand (society is singular, and needs a singular verb) for be a woman to be successful ~~woman~~ and e.g. to get a good job in the interview the woman who always win the vacancy are the beautiful and also to get promoted.(part after e.g. needs to be rewritten, it does not have proper subject-verb structure) To add more the advertizements in ~~publicity are~~ the magazines, TV, ~~and~~ newspapers and even posters on the streets shows women with good bodies, and beautiful faces. ~~âs~~ That~~âs to obligate~~ pressures the ordinary woman to try surgery solutions to be more acceptable.

Opponents of this view (you have not stated a view yet - what is the view?) say that the surgery is a miracle of the science because (?you need a subject for the verb "help") help increase their self-esteem and to solve some matters what the nature doesnât give them with some sessions of surgery and considerable money you (you is 2nd person, it does not match the earlier part of the sentence that is in 3rd person) would get the body or face of your dreams.

Taking everything into account, ~~I guess~~ cosmetic surgery help some women and hurt others but in generally is an option for people who disagree with their physical aspect, if you (you is 2nd person, it does not match the earlier part of the sentence that is in 3rd person) have the money and accept the risk ( you have not mentioned risk in your essay) is your choice.

Re: learning grammar - When, Why, etc...

Grammar Geek — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 17:41:58 GMT

I can only tell you my experiences as a parent.

My older daugher is 10. This year, she brought home papers in which she had to identify things like the simple subject, the complete subject, the simple predicate, the complete predicate, etc. She also had exercises last year on whether something was a predicate nominiative or predicate adjective. (Personally, I find these rather pointless.)

However, I was lucky enough to spend a good amount of time in her "language arts" classes last year (as a guest editor) and found that the emphasis is in coherent writing, a logical flow to the writing, etc. The students would do peer editing for things like capitalization, puncturation, and subject/verb agreement. Then final drafts are given to the teacher who includes corrections on the mechanics of grammar as well as the content of the essay. If several students seem to make the same type of mistake, the teacher would review - for example, rules about capitalization.

I haven't yet observed things like "None always takes a singular verb" or "Make the verb agree with last subject when you have a compound subject joined by 'or' " so I don't know if that is past, or future, or simply assumed and corrected as writing pieces are turned in.

However, my daughter was easily able to recite when you use "I" or "me" yesterday when someone (not me!) asked her about it.

I've been impressed with the teaching so far - the emphasis has been on being able to clearly communicate your ideas, but it doesn't allow for sloppy mechanics in fnal versions either.

Re: 10 Minutes Is OR 10 minutes are?

Starget1 — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 08:37:35 GMT

Yoong Liat wrote:
Starget1 wrote:
Buddhaheart wrote:

10 minutes are too short for me to finish that essay. No.

10 minutes is too short for me to finish that essay. Yes.

Since the plural noun (minutes) denotes a specific quantity (10) considered as a whole, a singular verb (is) is generally used.

Hi Buddhaheart, thanks!

How do I know when the plural noun (minutes) is considered as a whole?

Under which circumstances that I consider minutes as plural? Can you give me some examples? Thanks.

'Ten minutes' is a period. So 10 minutes (the time to finish the essay) is too short for me to finish that essay.

But 'Ten minutes (here the emphasis is on 'minutes') have passed."

Alright, so, whether to use singular or plural verb, it will depend on the sentence and its emphasis? If so, how if I cannot determine the emphasis if I do come across such situation in future?

Any advice for me if I do come across usage of time (such as hours/minutes/seconds) in the future?

Thanks Yoong Liat.

Re: 10 Minutes Is OR 10 minutes are?

Yoong Liat — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 07:27:18 GMT

Starget1 wrote:
Buddhaheart wrote:

10 minutes are too short for me to finish that essay. No.

10 minutes is too short for me to finish that essay. Yes.

Since the plural noun (minutes) denotes a specific quantity (10) considered as a whole, a singular verb (is) is generally used.

Hi Buddhaheart, thanks!

How do I know when the plural noun (minutes) is considered as a whole?

Under which circumstances that I consider minutes as plural? Can you give me some examples? Thanks.

'Ten minutes' is a period. So 10 minutes (the time to finish the essay) is too short for me to finish that essay.

But 'Ten minutes (here the emphasis is on 'minutes') have passed."

Re: 10 Minutes Is OR 10 minutes are?

Starget1 — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 06:19:20 GMT

Buddhaheart wrote:

10 minutes are too short for me to finish that essay. No.

10 minutes is too short for me to finish that essay. Yes.

Since the plural noun (minutes) denotes a specific quantity (10) considered as a whole, a singular verb (is) is generally used.

Hi Buddhaheart, thanks!

How do I know when the plural noun (minutes) is considered as a whole?

Under which circumstances that I consider minutes as plural? Can you give me some examples? Thanks.

Re: 10 Minutes Is OR 10 minutes are?

Buddhaheart — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 05:34:20 GMT

10 minutes are too short for me to finish that essay. No.

10 minutes is too short for me to finish that essay. Yes.

Since the plural noun (minutes) denotes a specific quantity (10) considered as a whole, a singular verb (is) is generally used.

Re: Parallelism with articles

Mister Micawber — Fri, 29 Sep 2006 05:36:50 GMT

If the author views them as one set, then s/he will use is, yes.

However, whether it is accepted by the reader (who may be the essay teacher) is another matter. Fundamentally, all 'rules' of the language (as here in the case of a compound subject) depend on an understanding and agreement between producer and receiver. If it is reasonable to both that operation and behaviour/functioning (which I now see, thanks to Clive, are all actually synonymous, so that our compound subject is in fact redundant) are a single set, then the singular verb works; but if the writer thinks they're a set while the reader does not envision them thus, then communication has (to a slight extent at least) failed, and the reader takes it as confusing or incorrect S-V concord.

Re: IELTS preperation essay (kindly of you to correct my essay)

julielai — Sun, 13 Nov 2005 15:21:54 GMT

Henbeibi wrote:

1: What's the meaning of parallel? I suppose you are telling me I should use "to use" instead of "using". Is it right?

- Yup.

Henbeibi wrote:
2: What's the meaning of agreement?

Radio seems the best way for them to know what are (agreement) happening in the world."

- It takes a singular verb.

Hope that helps!

Re: When to use 'is' and 'are' has caused an argument in the office

paco2004 — Sat, 11 Dec 2004 03:00:34 GMT

Essay on The Collective Noun by Sophie Johnson

Traditionally, the noun that names a collective is considered to be singular. Being singular, the verbial that denotes its act is also singular:
(1) The family prays every evening.
(2) Australia is playing against Portugal in the final round.
(3) The government is going to propose tough legislation in this matter.
Yet we regularly hear and read 'the government are', 'the family are', and in sports commentaries, even 'Australia are'. What, one might well ask, is going on? Is contemporary English denying the existence of the collective noun? This state of things is particularly bemusing for learners of English. That is little wonder, for the equivalent in their native tongues of 'my government are' is impossibly ungrammatical. The English, they tend to conclude, are disturbingly sloppy with their grammar.

But are we? Or is it that we are left free to use our language as we think reasonable, while everyone else is constrained to toe a pedant line? Unlike most other language areas, ours is not presided over by guardians who legislate upon its use. And that's just as well, in our estimate. For what, to take the case to hand, would be the good in our being ordered to respect the singular-noun status of the collective noun? Would respecting it add even a scrap to the lucidity of the meanings we make? Besides, when we talk about a 'family' that is doing something, or about a 'government' that is doing something, we envisage several people engaged in an activity. So why a singular verbial to pretend that only one person is doing it?

Such a line of argument is handy. But it won't explain all. There is still this sort of thing: We treat 'nation' as a collective noun:
(4) A nation is valiant when it defends itself.
But we treat 'people' as a plural noun:
(5)A people are valiant when they defend themselves.
We do this even though the two expressions are equi-meaning. We just do, that's all!

Nevertheless, what is 'a', the indefinite article that normally goes with singular nouns ('a dog', 'a shovel'.) doing before the plural noun 'people'? At this stage we might explain kindly to anyone who wants to know that the English article is something we use as we do because we know how to use it. Everyone else, sadly, does not.

Other oddities assail us even as we wriggle out of the sticky mire that 'a people are' landed us in. In this business, no news is good news. Now, hold it right there! 'News', apparently a plural noun, 'is'? Oh dear. There's no making light of this one. 'News', despite its plural form, takes the singular copula 'is', not the plural 'are'!

As if this were not vexation enough, there is the prissy business of 'the media are'. Why not 'the media is'? The fact that the Latin word 'media' is the plural form of 'medium' should surely not deter us from using the singular copula with it. The plural form of 'news' did not. But then, 'news' does not have a singular form: We always hear the latest bit of news, never the latest bit of new. 'Media' has a singular form: 'medium'. But that is a spiritual person, not newspapers and radio and television.

Are we getting somewhere, willy-nilly, having so far decided upon a policy of concluding nothing much? We probably are â into another mire: 'Constabulary' is a group noun, has a singular form and its act is denoted as a singular verbial:
(6) The constabulary needs to be free of political control.
A true collective noun!â one might celebrate it. But not for long. Its synonym, `the police', is a plural noun:
(7) The police need to be free of political control.
So why is one name a collective noun and its synonym a plural noun? All is lost!
What? What's this? 'All is? 'All are', surely? 'All' is a plural noun! But wait:
(8) All is lost if the cause is lost.
(9) All are lost if particular things or people are lost.
'All' both is and is not a collective noun, and it is and is not a plural noun. Where are we now in the collective noun/singular verbial showdown?

This sort of perambulation leaves us in no doubt that the collective noun/singular verb usage is in disarray in English. Can it be rationalised or is it now too late? In any case, how would we rationalise? What would happen, for instance, if a rule such as: 'Any noun that names a group as an abstraction is a collective noun and must take a singular verb' were forced upon English usage? Under such a regime we could say that:
(10) A government is good only as a democratic construct.
(11) This Government are doing a good job.
are grammatically proper. But then, we can do this anyway, if we want. And if not, not. Legislation, on the other hand, would deny us the latter alternative. We, being English speakers, do not take kindly to legislation on usage. Nor should we. For once it begins, where does it stop?

Sensible after-thought on a stand in support of the contemporary open-season on the collective noun is this: Tradition always has respectability. It also has clout, because traditionalists tend to out-number rebels and because traditional behavior always has connotations of refinement. To hazard an analogy: One can make meaning creditably without respecting the collective noun/singular verbial, just as one can eschew knife and fork yet dine well on steak. But doing either, what does one lose in polish? Writers should consider respecting collective nouns for reason alone that failure to do so is not appreciated universally. Indeed, many see that failure an ignorance.

Collecive Noun by S. Johnson