+0
Please help me in determining which of the above sentences are grammatically okay. Thanks!!

People once believed that the earth was flat and they might fall off the edge if they ever got there.
People once believed that the earth was flat and THAT they might fall off the edge if they ever got there.

Which of these is correct? Or, are both of them okay?

Do you know if she is around and is going to be in this meeting?
Do you know if she is around and SHE is going to be in this meeting?
Do you know if she is around and IF SHE is going to be in this meeting?

Stan will call you and provide you with the details.
Stan will call you and WILL provide you with the details.
Stan will call you, and HE WILL provide you with the details.
Stan will CALL AND PROVIDE you with the details.

He has been asked to open the door when the bell rings and see who is at the door.
He has been asked to open the door when the bell rings and TO see who is at the door. (Doesn't sound right! but still wanted to check with any of you.)

Thanks again..
1 2 3 4
Comments  
Hello ElViajero

This question is very interesting. Though I myself am not so sure about this grammatical issue, let me try to answer.

I understand the basic rule for "X and Y" is that X and Y should belong to the same category of syntactic constituents.

[OK] People believed that the earth was flat and they might fall off the edge if they ever got there.
[OK] People believed that the earth was flat and that they might fall off the edge if they ever got there.

[OK] Do you know if she is around and is going to be in this meeting?
[OK] Do you know if she is around and SHE is going to be in this meeting?
[OK] Do you know if she is around and IF SHE is going to be in this meeting?
[ * ] Do you know if she is around and going to be in this meeting?
"Is" in "is around" and "is" in "is going to" are different in constituent categories. The former is a true verb and the latter is an auxiliary verb.

[OK] Stan will call you and provide you with the details.
[OK] Stan will call you and will provide you with the details.
[OK] Stan will call you, and he WILL provide you with the details.
[ * ] Stan will call and provide you with the details.
This sentence is parsed as "Stan [will [call (....)] and [provide you with the details]" and so one will take the object of "call" is missing.

[OK] He has been asked to open the door when the bell rings and see who is at the door.
[ * ] He has been asked to open the door when the bell rings and to see who is at the door.
I too was taught coordinative use of two to-infinitives is ungrammatical, but the teacher didn't explain why it is so in spite of my repeated questioning. I would like to hear explanations from our teachers here.

paco
Paco - This is one of those cases, I fear, where the intuition of a native speaker does not necessarily correspond to the grammar books.

I don't know about the grammar rules, but none of the sentences you have marked with [*] sound "wrong" to me. In fact, in the group about Stan, I like the shortest sentence the best.

And in this one:

[1] Do you know if she is around and is going to be in this meeting?
[2] Do you know if she is around and SHE is going to be in this meeting?
[3] Do you know if she is around and IF SHE is going to be in this meeting?
[4] Do you know if she is around and going to be in this meeting?

I don't like the way [2] sounds - if you decide to repeat "she" in the second part I think you need to repeat "if." The other three sound okay to me -- I'm willing to believe that [4] violates some principle of grammar if you say so, but I would not hesitate to use it.

My daughter just pointed out a slight difference between [3] and [4] that I hadn't noticed at first, but I agreed with her. In [4] it sounds as though the speaker is assuming that if she is here, she will be going to the meeting - the speaker is expecting the same answer to both parts of the question. In [3], there are two separate questions. The answer might well be "She's here, but she's not going to the meeting," or "She's not here now, but I do expect her to be in the meeting."

I can't quite decide if [1] is more like [3] in meaning or like [4], and my daughter just went out, so I can't ask her opinion.
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
Hello Khoff (and moderators)

My judgment I put in my previous post was just on the grammatical validity. As for the interpretation of " Do you know if she is around and if she is going to be in this meeting?", your daughter may be right. If we take into account the writer's intention of using two "if"s, it would be reasonable to take it as an indirect interrogative sentence that combines two independent direct questions "Is she around here?" and "Is she going to be in this meeting?". I want to confirm it, but I can find this thing nowhere either in my grammar books or online. I hope some of our knowledgeable moderators could help us.

I was a bit surprised to hear from you that the following three sound no wrong.
[A] Do you know if she is around and going to be in this meeting?
Stan will call and provide you with the details.
[C] He has been asked to open the door when the bell rings and to see who is at the door.
I have already explained the reason I supposed [A] to be ungrammatical. We might say like "Stan will call and visit you" where the first "you" is omitted, but as to , I think we have to take it as "Stan will call you with the detail and provide you with the detail". I think this makes no sense. As for [C], I was taught in school to avoid an adverbial infinitival construct in the form of "to verb and to verb" though any teacher gave no reason to it. I would like to hear moderators' opinions about these things.

paco
Hello Teachers

Could you please help me to clear up my doubts?

paco
I would like to hear moderators' opinions about these things.

me too, Paco! Sentences [A] and [C] continue to sound perfectly normal to me.
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
1,3,4 sound OK to me (re Khoff's post)
Hello Khoff and Pianne

Thank you for the postings. I guess the reason Pieanne disagrees to [2] is that it sounds redundant because of the doubled "she"s. Right?

"Coordination" is connecting two things equal as a syntactic constituent to economize words. It is like math's sign "+". "***(B+C)" or "(B+C)*A" is OK only when B and C are equal in sentential functions. Let's take two sentences "He is a student" and "He is going to school". We can connect them into a sentence the way like "He is a student and is going to school". But do you think it is possible to say "He is a student and going to school"? I don't think it's possible. Let me show another example. "He loves you" and "He wants to live with you in Paris". Let me try to connect the two into one to save a "you". "He loves and wants to live with you in Paris". Do you think it's OK? One might take the sentence rather as "He loves to live with you in Paris and he wants to live with you in Paris".

paco
Wow! This discussion is interesting. Thanks very much to all of you, Paco, Khoff and Pieanne for your contributions.

Though I also felt the same as Paco about the last example in the last three sets of sentences, I thought I would get it clarified since I have seen many native speakers use these forms. But then, when you are a native speaker, you don't have to worry much about the rules and just say what sounds right to you; after all, it's "your" language. But by some weird logic, non-native speakers cannot afford to make mistakes as otherwise they can be seen as speaking bad English, and as a result, proficient non-native English speakers sometimes speak grammatically correct English than do natives although this takes time and practice.

Could you also please tell me which form in the sets of sentences in my post are the preferred forms? Thanks again for everything!!
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
Show more