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

Re: Correct or Not

Eimai_Anglos — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 11:42:56 GMT

"why was late reply" is not a sentence. It has no meaning. In English a sentence begins with a capital letter and ends with a punctuation mark (. ; : ? !)

In addition, you seem to have omitted a definite or indefinite article or a possessive pronoun and mixed up the word order.

"Why was his reply late?"

"Why was the reply late?"

Re: Lack of emphasis on NPs in ESL

Forbes — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:59:28 GMT

Much linguistic analysis is neither intended for nor useful as a language teaching aid. It all depends on what language you know and what language you are learning.

Leaving aside pronouns, in English you do not need to change the ending of a noun according to whether it is the subject or object of a sentence. The same applies to French. So, when you teach French to English speakers, or English to French speakers, there is no need to go into long explanations about "subject and objects". When you teach Russian on the other hand you are not going to get very far without the pupils having a conscious understanding (they will of course already have an unconscious understanding) of "subjects and objects".

With possession however it is different. In English we have the possessive "s". So a French speaker needs to think a bit about the idea of possession when he learns English. However, this is not necessary if he is learning Spanish; he just needs to know the Spanish for "of". When the pupil advances he will find forms such as "house furnishings" and when he does he can consider whether "house" is an s-less genitive or a noun used attributively, but even then, I am not sure it is particularly helpful. What is important is that the pupil gets to know that in English nouns can be used in ways that they cannot be or are rarely used in French; they can be "piled up" as in North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, which in French has to be "The Treaty of the Atlantic of the North". Whether an analysis shows that in such a case North, Atlantic and Treaty may not in fact be nouns does not really help.

Re: Grammar point, please help clarify this

Huevos — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 18:50:05 GMT

Raen
1. As far as I know, all 3 articles are "always" followed by a noun and/or adjective+noun. Why are they labeled as "adjectives" when coming before a noun or adjective+noun? Why not just call them adjectives to begin with? and why can't they stand as their original identity which is "articles".

Here's what Wikipedia says: An article is a word that combines with a noun to indicate the type of reference being made by the noun. The three main articles in the English language are the, an and a. It is sometimes wondered which part of speech articles belong to. Despite much speculation, articles are adjectives, as they do describe nouns; Linguists place them in a different category, that of determiners.

Raen
2. "my, your, our, their" are always adjective. A layman would say why not the other possessive pronouns: "her, his, her, its...". What's so special abut the first 4?

Wikipedia says no on this: Depending on the theory the grammar subscribes to, English "possessive adjectives" are determiners or pronouns: possessive determiners,[1] possessive pronouns,[2] dependent genitive pronouns,[3] weak possessive pronouns,[4] and so forth. They are not adjectives, because they can be substituted for and cannot co-occur with another determiner such as an article or a demonstrative.

So the answer to your question: "So would you say this particular grammar point is widely accepted by native-speakers and/or linguistic community?", is no.

Re: Grammar point, please help clarify this

Raen — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 17:12:17 GMT

Thanks Huevos for you enlightment. But could we, just for the sake of arguement, allow me to examine the merit of this grammar point:

It says: There are 7 words that are "always" adjectives: articles "a", "an" and "the" and possessive pronouns "my", "your", "our" and "their".

1. As far as I know, all 3 articles are "always" followed by a noun and/or adjective+noun. Why are they labeled as "adjectives" when coming before a noun or adjective+noun? Why not just call them adjectives to begin with? and why can't they stand as their original identity which is "articles". An example in the practice that asks us to identify the part of speech for each word:

Q: Both the big girl and a small boy were happy with the results.

A: Both - conjunction, the - adjective, big - adjective, girl - noun, and - conjunction, a - adjective, small - adjective, boy - noun, were - verb, happy - adjective, with - preposition, the - adjective, results - noun.

Both "the" were identified as adjective. Why can't they just be "article"? What is the big idea for them to be labeled as "adjective"?

2. "my, your, our, their" are always adjective. A layman would say why not the other possessive pronouns: "her, his, her, its...". What's so special abut the first 4?

Anyway, I know it's not good to over think. But this is just one of the grammar points I find hard to comprehend. Thanks to everyone for their imput, and thanks for the good-will wish on my test, I sure hope I'll pass.

Regards

Raen

Re: Grammar point, please help clarify this

Huevos — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 10:08:46 GMT

Raen
So would you say this particular grammar point is widely accepted by native-speakers and/or linguistic community?

Whether or not people choose to accept it is irrelevant, it's a fact. Have a look at this:

smooth coat
chihuahua
domesticated
dog
canis
caninae
canidae
carnivora
mammal
chordata
animal

Now when you see a chihuahua ask the owner if it is a "chordata". Most would say no, it's a "chihuahua", but of course it is a "chordata", it's just that someone who doesn't understand the heirarchy or is not familiar with greater terminology wouldn't even know what a chordata was.

Words follow a similar heirarchy with lexical classes within lexical classes, within lexical classes. In the case of your question "adjectives" are a super class that contains, among others, determiners. Then in the determiner class we have, among others, articles, possessive derterminers (possessive adjectives and possessive pronouns), etc. And so on and so forth.

Re: Parse this sentence please.

Anonymous — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 09:59:46 GMT

this is what I have so far, but I'm not sure where to go from here.

Normal 0 A (article) twitch (noun) at (preposition) the (article) controls (noun) could (verb) swerve (verb) the (article) catâ (noun), but (conjunction) the (article) driverâs (noun) hands (noun) could (verb) not (adverb) twitch (verb) because (conunction) the (article) monster (noun) that built (verb) the (article) tractor (noun), the (article) monster (noun) that sent (verb) the (article) tractor (noun) out (preposition), had somehow (adverb) got (verb) into (preposition) the (article) driverâs (noun) hands (noun), into (preposition) his (possessive pronoun) brain (noun) and (conjunction) muscle (noun), had goggled (verb) him (pronoun) and (conjunction) muzzled (verb) him (pronoun) âgoggled (verb) his (possessive pronoun) mind (noun), muzzled (verb) his (possessive pronoun) speech(noun), goggled (verb) his (possessive pronoun) perception (noun), muzzled (verb) his (possessive pronoun) protest (noun).

Re: trying to improve

Avangi — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 23:34:51 GMT

Anonymous
I am just trying to improve my english and dont have any mentor, Can someone please let me know if what i understand or do is right or wrong?

I have some sentences below and i just wanted to know if they are correct - Take care to capitalize the pronoun "I." All sentences need punctuation at the end, eg., a period.

I was abashed by the email sent by my manager   This is correct, but the word is uncommon in everyday speech. "Unabashed" is much more common. Google hits: "abashed" - 653,000   /   "unabashed" - 2,090,000

The aboriginal soundtrack was better than the remix Use "original." "aboriginal" is a very special word, meaning "native," as in the native population of a region. I've never heard it used in everyday speech, other than to refer to the native inhabitants of Australia. I think it may also refer to flora, but I'm not sure. How far back one goes, I have no idea, but I've only heard it used in referring to existing populations.

The class was abridged due to lack of time   Correct, but very uncommon. I'd use "cut short." "Abridged" is commonly used to describe shortened versions of books. Also, "due to" is ungrammatical. Use "because of." The difference is technical. Check Google, "because of vs. due to." If you don't get it, post back. ( "The shortness of the class was due to the lack of time," is correct.)

I abstained myself from participating in the cultural events   You must delete "myself." The verb "to abstain" is intransitive only. (There's no transitive usage.) It does not take an object, even reflexive. You may say "I recused myself," but that has a special meaning. You may say "I withdrew myself from the event," but then you can't use "participating." ("To withdraw" may be either transitive or intransitive.)

I abstained myself from bungee jumping since I am scared of heights  Same objection!

I recieved an acrimonious email from my manager. okay!

The client attacked acrimoniously to the lawyer after he lost the case The verb "to attack" does not take the preposition "to." In this case, the adverb should come either before the verb or after the object   -   I'm not sure why. "The client acrimoniously attacked the lawyer," or "The client attacked the lawyer acrimoniously."

Acids usually have an acrid odor okay!

The washroom had a acrid odor   okay!

Beacuse I understand technology very well I can make acute decisions based on my knowhow This is correct, "acute" meaning "sharp" decisions, but it's uncommon. "Accurate decisions" would be common. "I have an acute pain   -   acute angina" is common. "An acute angle" (less than ninety degrees   -    geometry) is common.   ~~Beacuse~~   Because

Engineers are adept at learning new theories. Okay, but I guess we don't know the same engineers.

Employees should Adhere to the companies policies No cap on "adhere."   Possessive "company's."

The office was adorned on christmas eve  Capitalize "Christmas."

Childrens seek adulation from parents No "s" on "children"

Affable people are good to be friends with okay

She is aloof okay

india is an agrarian country Capitalize "India."

I have a altruistic nature Use "an" form of article before a vowel. (an apple)

The policy of my company was amended after march Capitalize "March."

I was allured by her beauty okay

Mumbai has ample food to feed the people okay, but "its/her people" might be better.

My debts were annulled with my last salary Use "wiped out!" "Our marriage was annulled by the Church/court." -   something done by an official body.

A diamond ring would help me appease my wife  okay

I was apprised by my manager regarding the appraisal i recd (I received.)

I had an arduous project last month okay, but we don't usually use "had" with "project." "I had/performed an arduous task"   /   "I took on an arduous project."

When you get to the "B's," don't put them all in one post, or you'll crash the site! - A.

Grammar point, please help clarify this

Anonymous — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 21:17:42 GMT

Hi, I need help with this grammar point.

I was preparing myself for an English Grammar test, the material I'm studying to prepare for the test says that there are 7 words, namely 3 articles (a, an, the) and 4 possessive pronouns (my, our, your, their), are always "adjectives". What?! Could someone be kind enough to explain the logic or reason for that? I just simply can't wrap my head around that concept. Thanks.

Raen

Re: HELP WITH PROPER GRAMMER PLEASE.

Anonymous — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 00:49:17 GMT

NO

Do each of you own something, or do the two of you own one thing in common?
I's is not a word. My or mine are proper possessive pronouns.

Alexa's and my music recorders are the best.
Alexa's and my music recorder is the best.

Re: gerund or verbal noun with an article?

Anonymous — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 12:36:08 GMT

hi,
i've been struggling with coming to grips with the differences between verbal nouns and gerunds.
e.g. John's singing the national anthem bothered me. or John's singing of the national anthem bothered me.
which is correct, and in the second case is 'singing' a gerund or verbal noun?

The beginning of the book is better than the middle or end sections.
The beginning of a new book is always the most rewarding part. (beginning here meaning starting to read)
the first case is rather clear, i am not speaking of an action and it must be a verbal noun, but you can see where the problem lies.

The writing of a book is always an ambitious undertaking. (writing is the verbal noun)

from an article on verbal nouns on wikipedia,

The gerund is like the participle ..frequently modified by a possessive noun or pronoun.

taken from An English Grammar by W. M. Baskervill & J. W. Sewell

i am really confused as to what makes a gerund a gerund, and when a verbal noun is a verbal noun. any help in this matter would be really appreciated.