Search results for 'tag:Predicates tag:Nouns' matching tags 'Predicates' and 'Nouns'

Re: One of many problems faced by English learners is their own misconceptions.

Avangi — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 23:27:00 GMT

Jackson6612

Avangi
either "learners of the English language," or "English language learners."
Why is article the essential here? There is only one English language. e.g. I'm learning Chinese language these days. Is there any need to specify Chinese language using the? The use of the is justified in sentences as in ''I'm learning the Southern American English dialect nowadays. The article is required in all of these. I honestly have no idea why. My guess is that "language" is the object of the verb "to learn," and would require an article if it were used without "English" as a modifier. To qualify for standing without the article, a "subject of study" must be one of a few very well-established courses. "I'm majoring in Romance Languages at university." Here, Romance Languages is the recognized name of a well-established course of study, as is Chinese. In the case of a dialect, the indefinite article would be used if there were more than one. Avangi
<<One - - is their own misconceptions.>> IMO there should be number agreement here. Possibly, "One - - - is dealing with their own misconceptions."
Yes, there should be number agreement between verb and object. If I followed your suggestion then the sentence would read: One of many problems faced by learners of the English language is that they are dealing with their own misconceptions. Is that what you suggested? That would be fine. I was considering "that they are" to be optional, as the gerund "dealing" may serve by itself as predicate nominative following the being verb "is." Avangi
This is about "learners." You refer back five times with "they." At some point you might remind the reader who "they" are. Eg, "these learners," "the students," something else of your choosing.
Is choosing'' used as a present participle in the above context? I'd say functionally it's a gerund, serving as object of the preposition "of." The other option, "choice," would of course be a noun.
Avangi
<<During the learning process, they should stop taking the machinery of their native tongue for granted.>> As the final sentence of the first paragraph, this seems enigmatic. It's very well phrased, but the meaning is less than obvious (to me.) I feel like I want an additional sentence by way of (=as means of, as a type of) explanation, or clarification. Optionally, you could make your "machinery" image a little easier to connect up.
How can I make the machinery image a little easier to connect up? How did I know you were going to ask me that danged question?? During the learning process they should remind themselves that the machinery of their native tongue was a long time in [the] building and fine-tuning, and they must be willing to devote an equal effort to the new language. (I'm not sure I have your intention right.)
Avangi
In the second paragraph, at first blush (=when first thought of or considered) the antecedent (=a word or phrase which a pronoun refers back to) of "They" would seem to be "English speakers."
Yes, you are right. I will be more careful about such constructions in future.
Avangi
Have you verified that "idiomaticness" is a word? Or is it a "nonce (=occurring, used, or made only once or for a special occasion) word"?
It is a proper word according to the Merriam-Webster's dictionary.

Congratulations on your hard work. - A.

Edit. "Why is the article "the" essential here?"

Re: Pronoun Case. Please Help.

Avangi — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 16:57:34 GMT

Hi, Eddie, thanks for catching my "it's." I make that error about 60% of the time and catch it on re-read about 90% of the time.

I think A. Stars answered you well on "That is he." There are two issues: the grammar issue, and the usage issue.

Re the grammar, there are various transformations possible, but to keep it simple, the subject usually comes first, followed by the verb. Here's a compound sentence: Cogito ergo sum - I think, therefore I am. "I think" is an action verb. "I am" is a being verb. It just means "I exist." But the being verb (simple predicate) is more often followed by a predicate nominative OR a predicate adjective. I am an actor. That is I (in the picture). That was I (on the phone). (Do you know who the guy is who/that broke my window?) I am he. Both the subject and the complement are nominative, but most people use an objective case complement, "That was me." Most people would even say, "It was me who broke your window." (Predicate adjectives would be, "I am drunk;" "I am late.")
What I started out to say when I wandered, is that in your example, "That must be he on the plane," in terms of subjects and objects this is the same as "That is he on the plane," or "He is he on the plane." The being verb acts like an equal sign. "He is John." "He = John." But, just because "He" is the subject of the sentence and "He" = "John" doesn't mean that "John" is really the subject of the sentence, in terms of the syntax !
Personally, I get a strong sense of equality from the being verb, which is why I personally prefer to use the nominative case complement.
But to say the complement equals the subject is not the same as to say that it is the subject. The first is contextual; the second is syntactical.
Anyway, "That's him on the plane," is as correct as any other substitution of objective in place of nominative case pronouns.

Re: Pronoun Case. Please Help.

AlpheccaStars — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 14:39:06 GMT

Eddie88
I was wondering when you said, 'right again! the pronoun and it's object must make up...'

In America (assuming this is where you are based) do they use apostrophes to show possession of these pronouns? (it's object). Where I am from, we omit the apostrophe to avoid the confusion with the contraction, 'it is.'

The it's is not correct, even in American English.

It's = = it is.

its = = possessive case of it.

Eddie88
What I am saying is that 'that must be he on the plane' isn't he the subject of the sentence?

He is in the predicate nominative case. However, in casual speech following "must be" we break the grammatical rule and use the objective case. .

Re: Pronoun Case. Please Help.

Avangi — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 03:58:32 GMT

Eddie88
1)    This was an example on an internet site: 'That must be him on the phone'

The site suggested that it should read, 'that must be he on the phone'    Correct. But I'm the only person I know personally who says it that way.

Their justification was this: the nominative form of the pronoun following the verb be  Right !   I am I, Don Quixote! The first "I" is the subject of the sentence, the second is the predicate nominative, following the "to be" verb.

Now, I understand this; however, could the justification be equally sound if I were to say that it is the nominative (subjective) case because the pronoun is the subject of the sentence, so it should be HE? Absolutely true! But that principle does not apply in any way to your first example. It must be a different sentence. He is he, Don Quixote. (Sorry, that's a little too cute. let's say, "He is on the phone.")
Perhaps you mean to say that "He" is the subject of the real sentence, or he is the person performing the action in the real meaning of the sentence. I've heard these things discussed, but they have nothing to do with the syntax of the sentence. That is, they're contextual, not syntactical, or something like that.

However, this raises another problem for me. When there is a preposition, the pronoun is meant to be in the objective case. Is this only true when the preposition PRECEEDS the pronoun? Because in this case, ON follows the pronoun, so I wasn't sure if the rule applied.   Right again! The pronoun and it's object must make up a prepositional phrase. She brought the water to us.  The ground was shaking under him. She was walking beside me.    "She" (nominative) is subject of the sentence. "Me" (objective) is object of the preposition. He is on the phone. The object of the preposition "on" is "phone," certainly not "he."
Edit. Oh yes, sorry I forgot Winston Churchill's famous exception, This is the sort of bloody nonsense up with which I will not put.

2)    Could you please tell me the rules for the usage of were and was? For example, in line 4 of this writing piece is it 'if I were to say...' or 'if I was to say... ' WHY?
"Were" (first person singular) is the correct use of the subjunctive mood in certain "if" sentences, but few people (like me) use it anymore. Simple past ("was") is considered acceptable. Do a search for "subjunctive" on this site or elsewhere.

3)    Finally, in academic prose one is not to use the word that too often, if at all. Once again in line 4, the word that is used here. It sounds correct to use that rather than which. Should I use which to be more formal, even though it sounds weird? Sorry, I'm not finding your example.

Sorry, I took "in line 4 of this writing piece" as a colloquialism, "in line 4 of a certain writing piece." I thought it was weird.

Re: I am GOOD/ I am WELL

Anonymous — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 12:07:48 GMT

Usage Note: English speakers have usedÂ wellÂ both as an adjective and as an adverb since Old English times. When applied to people, the adjectiveÂ wellÂ usually refers to a state of health. Like similar adjectives, such asÂ illÂ andÂ faint, wellÂ in this use is normally restricted to the predicate, as inÂ He hasn't been well lately. WellÂ does see occasional use before a noun, as in Benjamin Franklin's "Poor Dick eats like a well man, and drinks like a sick." It also appears in compound adjectives likewell-baby,Â which is well known to pediatricians and recent parents.Â Good,Â on the other hand, has a much wider range of senses, including "attractive," as inÂ He looks good,Â and "competent," as inÂ She's pretty good for a beginner,Â as well as "healthy."

(an appendix to my previous post suggesting that Anonymous finds a good teacher!)

Re: Odd syntax?

Grammar Geek — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 18:34:54 GMT

It is a complicated sentence.

seroMack

President-elect Barack Obama -noun has begun an effort to tamp down - predicate what his aides fear are unusually high expectations among his supporters - object.

What he is tamping down are expectations. Which expections? The ones his aides fear are unusually high. The "are" goes with "what" which refers to "expectations." The expectations are feared.

Here are few other phrases that use similar constructions:

What farmers hope is a moderately dry summer. A dry summer is what is hoped for (by the farmers).

What I expect was his final performance. His final performance is what is expected.

What you plan to be your most successful party of the year. The success party if what you play.

What his aides fear are unusually high expectations.

Re: singular/plural

AlpheccaStars — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 04:22:53 GMT

Taka:

I think it would always be X is Y. The subject will always be a certain quantity of the non-count predicate noun. See these examples:

Six weeks is a long time to wait for a letter.

Three grains is not much rice.

Five gallons is enough gas to fill the tank.

Re: the diver could end up (being) stuck too far underwater

Angliholic — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 01:32:30 GMT

AlpheccaStars
Angliholic
the diver could end up (being) stuck too far underwater to be able to get up in time to breathe.

The correct form is "being stuck".The reason is that the phrasal verb "end up" needs a noun for a direct object.. "being" is a gerund, which is used as a noun. Examples from the dictionary are:

He thought he'd end up living in the city. He ended up marrying his high school sweetheart.

The other sentence is:

If there were a problem, he would be stuck too far underwater ... "be" does not take a direct object, so the predicate adjective "stuck" is used.

Stuck is the past participle of "stick"

Thanks, AlpheccaStars.

But the original (from an English magazine) omits "being," so I wonder whether it's better to have "being" or not.

Btw, are there any differences between "he would end up stuck ..." and "he would be stuck ...?"

Re: the diver could end up (being) stuck too far underwater

AlpheccaStars — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 01:16:58 GMT

Angliholic
the diver could end up (being) stuck too far underwater to be able to get up in time to breathe.

The correct form is "being stuck".The reason is that the phrasal verb "end up" needs a noun for a direct object.. "being" is a gerund, which is used as a noun. Examples from the dictionary are:

He thought he'd end up living in the city. He ended up marrying his high school sweetheart.

The other sentence is:

If there were a problem, he would be stuck too far underwater ... "be" does not take a direct object, so the predicate adjective "stuck" is used.

Stuck is the past participle of "stick"

Re: I need help with determining the parts of speech w/ this sentence!!!!

Avangi — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 20:18:15 GMT

Welcome to English Forums.

It's an imperative sentence, the subject being (you) understood.
"Give" is a verb, present tense, second person singular or plural, the simple predicate of the sentence.
"yearbook" is a noun, the direct object of the verb.
"whoever" is a pronoun, subject of the dependent clause, "whoever paid for one." The clause is object of the preposition "to."
"paid" = verb
"for" = preposition
"one" = pronoun, in this case.

While "whoever paid for one" is a clause, if you removed it from the sentence, I don't believe you'd be left with another separate clause. "Give a yearbook" could be considered to be a clause, but in this sentence, the prepositional phrase, "to whoever paid for one" is an integral part of the main clause.

Best wishes, - A.