Search results for 'tag:Possessives tag:Constructions' matching tags 'Possessives' and 'Constructions'

Re: "a" or "the"

Clive — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 03:19:33 GMT

Hi,
But doesn't the use of a possessive adjective in these particular examples have the effect of emphasizing the negative quality perceived in the described person, object or situation... or am I imagining this? I realize the difference may be subtle... but if there is one, I'd like to know about it. You may be right to some extent. However, if there is that difference, it's a very subtle one. You don't think you get a similar negative sense if you talk about 'the oversized earrings'? And there's nothing immediately negative about 'a/the/her blue dress'.
I think a great deal more negativity is likely to be conveyed in other ways, eg by tone of voice, facial expression, the use of negative adjectives.
I think the particular context and the particular topic of conversation plays a role, too.

a) "(...) to say nothing of that rundown store with its neon sign that keeps blinking on and off." Doesn't this construction suggest that the defective neon is (at least partially) directly responsible for the store being perceived as rundown and dilapidated?

b) "(...) particulaly that screeching soprano with her oversized earrings and blue dress." Isn't this the equivalent of saying: "As if it weren't enough that she has a screeching voice, her taste in clothing is shockingly bad."

Of course, as always, I could be wrong... Correct me if that's the case. I'm trying very hard to understand.

Clive

Re: "a" or "the"

MarvinTheMartian — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 00:00:43 GMT

But doesn't the use of a possessive adjective in these particular examples have the effect of emphasizing the negative quality perceived in the described person, object or situation... or am I imagining this? I realize the difference may be subtle... but if there is one, I'd like to know about it.

a) "(...) to say nothing of that rundown store with its neon sign that keeps blinking on and off." Doesn't this construction suggest that the defective neon is (at least partially) directly responsible for the store being perceived as rundown and dilapidated?

b) "(...) particulaly that screeching soprano with her oversized earrings and blue dress." Isn't this the equivalent of saying: "As if it weren't enough that she has a screeching voice, her taste in clothing is shockingly bad."

Of course, as always, I could be wrong... Correct me if that's the case. I'm trying very hard to understand.

Re: 's or not

Philip — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 23:13:28 GMT

Grammar Geek

I can think of a few situations in which you might say "I'm going to Bob," but it doesn't sound particularly natural.

For example: If you don't stop playing games on your computer when you should be working, I'm going to Bob (our boss). [I might go directly to him personally, or I might phone or email him.]

I do dislike the double possessive. I usually change the construction to 'one of Alison's friends'. Personal preference.

Re: "as ... as" expression

Spides — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 18:30:35 GMT

Your instinct is right--the phrase refers to "last year's figure" but the word "figure" is understood and so dropped. So grammatically the spelling should be year's. However, it has become common ~~especially in conversation~~to drop the 's, and that has slipped into common usage in many cases. It's common for this to happen, as a language is a constantly changing thing. But careful writers will still, I think, make that a possessive form. A similar thing has happened with a sentence like, "James is taller than I." The pronoun "I" is correct because the entire sentence would be "James is taller than I am," but when the understood verb "am" is dropped, many speakers will say, "James is taller than me." That construction, too, has slipped into common usage in writing for many people. In fact, those who insist on the grammatically correct form are thought of as old-fashioned, perhaps, by many.

Re: 13. Driving by anger, John slapped across Mary,s face.

CalifJim — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 03:56:54 GMT

1. You need the past participle in these sentence opening constructions with by.

Driven by anger, Disappointed by the results, Frightened by a gunshot, ...

2. The syntax you're looking for is not Verb + Prep + Possessive + Body Part.

You want Verb + Person + Prep + the + Body Part

slapped Mary across the face

touched Marty on the cheek

poked Joe in the ribs

cut Tom on the arm

You leave out the preposition and the if you use the possessive. Verb + Possessive + Body Part

slapped Mary's face

touched Marty's cheek

poked Joe's ribs

cut Tom's arm

Re: Possessive case question

Breaker — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 19:11:55 GMT

Thanks, Mister Micawber.

The origin of my question is that the name of the friend is "Jack" and not "Jack's". Some time in the past, someone must have pointed this out to me, and, ever since, I have carefully avoided this construction.

Re: Passive

Yankee — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:32:19 GMT

Lin1978 wrote:
Thank you, Master Yankee. Your answer is quite clear. But I still have one small question. Last time my teacher told me that, "if I have two different subjects in a main clause and in a conditional, and I want to use the participle phrase, I have to keep both two subjects or change it into possessive case to avoid getting confused." That sounds about right, except that you cannnot simply insert the subject into a participle phrase. You must also change the participle to the appropriate verb tense.

In this sentence, there is no need to add "we" or "they" in the conditional (1), like "after we repeating the experiments and tests, PS3 has finally been successfully produced,"(2) or change it into "after our repeating experiments and tests, PS3 has finally been successfully produced." (3) Because the subject is clear and no one will get confused. Am I right?

Hi Lin1978

(1) The sentence you are referring to is not a conditional sentence.

(2) "after we repeating the experiments and tests,..." ==> This is never grammatical!

"After repeating the experiments and tests" is grammatical" and it means:
- "After the experiments and tests were repeated, ..." (simple past tense, passive voice)
OR
- "After I/you/he/she/we/they/ repeated the experiments and tests, ..." (simple past tense, active voice)

The passive voice is frequently used when it is not important or not known who performed the action. In the active sentence above, I don't know who repeated the experiments and tests. However, I assume it was the same person or people who produced PS3.

(3) In a passive sentence, the subject is usually unknown or not important. As I mentioned above, in your sentence it can be assumed that the same person or people who produced PS3 also performed the experiments and test. But there is no way for me to know exactly who that person or those people were.

Inserting a possessive adjective before a gerund does not always result in a natural construction.
"After our repeating the experiments and tests" is extremely awkard. Your sentence is not a good candidate for the insertion of the possessive adjective.

Re: Possession

khoff — Fri, 28 Sep 2007 05:47:02 GMT

As Jim said, "Although there are lots of exceptions, the main use of the possessive construction ('s) is with a person, that is, with entities to whom things can belong."

Your teacher might not think that dogs can possess things, but dogs think otherwise -- I hope your teacher never tries to take away a dog's bone.

Americans at least, tend to think of their pets as members of the family, and so, especially when referring to a specific animal, using the 's form would not seem strange at all. I might go to the store to buy "a dog bed" but when my own dog is sleeping in it I would call it "the dog's bed." Someone might buy "cat food," but they might also serve it to the cat up on a table so that the dog would not eat "the cat's food."

In fact, I never heard of the "rule" that the 's form could only be used for people until I started reading this forum -- it's certainly not something most native speakers are taught. I would be more likely to say "the table leg" or "the leg of the table," but if I heard someone say "the table's leg" I would not think "that's wrong!" And even if you maintain that only someone/something that can possess things can take the 's, I see nothing at all wrong with using it for animals. Of course, I'm not your teacher, so I can't tell you what to write in class; I'm just telling you how I use it as a native speaker.

Re: Possession

CalifJim — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 19:36:13 GMT

Although there are lots of exceptions, the main use of the possessive construction ('s) is with a person, that is, with entities to whom things can belong.

A nation consists of many people, so the nation's history does not stray far from the basic principle. However, in the other examples you present, it's usually better to use a compound noun or an of construction. In many cases, only attention to typical usage determines which.

a school bell, a dog bone, the door of a house

Since a dog is one of the domesticated animals, there may be a case for using a dog's bone.

CJ

Examining sentences

Anonymous — Tue, 22 May 2007 13:31:08 GMT

Please tell me if my reasoning regarding the following sentences is correct and/or add your explanation.

1. When parents have poor listening habits, their children usually do. -- As a common sense, it would seem better with 'do' than with 'have' but cannot explain why. Why 'do' is better?

2. I am not so particular about my being corrected by others who know better. -- Is 'being corrected' a noun phrase? Can you tell me how to clearly identify what a noun phrase is so I can clearly distinguish a situation that requires a possessive pronoun?

3. By breaking the routine of the usual and adding some variety. -- Could this construction be readily acceptable to you? Pay special attention to the underlined part please.