Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2001 01:53:48 +0200 (CEST) From: Salvo Bartolotta <bartequi@neomedia.it> To: Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in> Cc: "Bruce A. Mah" <bmah@FreeBSD.ORG>, Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org>, mwlucas@blackhelicopters.org, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: docs/30203: description of security profiles in FAQ is just plain wrong Message-ID: <999474828.3b92c68c38136@webmail.neomedia.it> In-Reply-To: <20010901095417.A618@lpt.ens.fr> References: <999306309.3b903445f411a@webmail.neomedia.it> <20010901095417.A618@lpt.ens.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[ it's becoming OT even for chat...]
Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in> wrote:
> Salvo Bartolotta said on Sep 1, 2001 at 03:05:09:
> > >> "...what each of the security profiles does". The verb (does)
> doesn't
> > >> agree in number with the subject (profiles). Or something like
> >
> > >Actually, the subject is "each", which is singular. I'm pretty sure
>
> > >Michael is right on this one.
> >
> > As others have pointed out, this is essentially correct.
> >
> > More precisely, "each of" is used before a pronoun or determiner (the,
> my,
> > those...); the pronoun or noun is plural. As subject, "each of +
> plural
> > expression" is *usually* followed by a singular verb; however, the
> verb can
> > be plural in an informal style.
> >
> > The use of "each" makes us think of things/people "separately". This
> explains
> > why "nearly every + countable noun" is preferred to "nearly each +
> (countable
> > noun)"; it also explains the (normal) singular verb in the foregoing.
>
> But it's also singular for "every" -- for instance, "nearly every
> sheep has four legs" where "sheep" and "has" are both singular. But
> it would be plural with "all". When you prefer a plural, you'd
> probably say "what all of the security profiles do" but in this case
> that's probably inappropriate. Also it leads to ambiguity: do you
> mean they all do it together, or any one of them does it?
Sorry for the unwanted implication. When "every" determines the (singular)
head of a subject noun phrase, a singular verb IS required.
BTW, there are slight differences in meaning between "every" and "each",
illustrated in these nice examples (cf M. Swan, Practical English Usage, 2nd
edition, OUP, 1995):
-- The business makes less money each/every year. [year, NOT years]
-- She had a child holding on to each hand. [Only "each" is possible]
-- Each person in turn went to see the doctor. [Think different^Wseparate]
-- He gave every patient the same medicine. [closer to "all"]
In a more "anonymous" context, the last sentence might become: "Every patient
was given the same medicine".
> > > The prepositional phrase "of the security profiles" confuses things
> a
> > > bit. A trick that my seventh-grade English teacher Mrs. Cantrell
> taught
> > > me was to take out the prepositional phrase (which is optional in a
> > > structural sense anyways) and see if the sentence still seems
> > > correct...in this case, "each [...] does" vs. "each [...] do".
> >
> > Sorry, but Mrs Cantrell was plain wrong. :-)
> >
> > The reasons originate in syntax, as it were, interwoven with
> semantics, "a
> > number of people are wrong" being a trivial counter-example.
>
> It certainly *sounds* wrong but that's perhaps more to do with common
> usage than formal rules of syntax or semantics. That is, the word
> "number" could grammatically be a collective noun, but here the phrase
> "a number of people" is normally taken as a single, plural unit with a
> specific connotation (you won't replace "a" with "the" in the next
> sentence, for instance). This roughly agrees with what your faq says.
Ooops, maybe I used an obscure expression. :-)
In "A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language", Longman, 1985, R. Quirk
discusses concord (also termed agreement) at some lenght, introducing:
1) the principle of grammatical concord: singular subject, singular verb;
2) the principle of notional concord: singular subject with plural meaning,
plural verb;
3) the principle of proximity (also termed attraction): "agreement of the verb
with a closely preceding noun phrase that functions as subject".
Difficulties over concord arise through occasional conflict between 1) and the
other principles. A few examples from Quirk's book:
-- The government have broken all their promises. <British English>
^^^^ ^^^^^
[Notional concord prevailing over grammatical concord]
-- ?No one except his own supporters agree with him. [Proximity principle
reinforced by notional concord. It is the reason for a number of mistakes, as
Mrs. Cantrell had noticed. "?" means that native speakers are unsure about
acceptability]
-- Ten dollars is all I have left. [Notional concord. "That amount is..."]
^^
-- Fifteen years represents a long period of his life. [Notional concord]
^^^^^^^^^^
At the phrase level:
-- That/these five dollars; this/these last few weeks; every few miles; each
ten ounces; another two days; a happy three months...
Other interesting examples:
-- More than one member has protested against the proposal.
-- Many a member has protested against the proposal.
[Grammatical concord conflicting with notional concord. The noun head is seen
as singular ("member"), which determines concord. Cf "More members than one
have protested..." or "Many members have protested..."]
> Collective nouns aren't clear-cut too; I was having an argument with
> someone once about this. Do you say "the committee has met" or "the
> committee have met"? He said the English prefer the latter (today, at
> least) and the Americans prefer the former.
In British English, the plural is used (well, it is more likely) when a group
seen as a collection of individuals; the singular when a group is seen as a
whole.
-- The audience were enjoying every minute of it. [The plural is more likely,
since attention is directed at the individual reactions]
Cf:
-- The audience was enormous. [The plural here might imply
enormous people :-)]
Americans do prefer the singular. However, they also sometimes use the plural:
-- The couple are happily married. [Cf Each couple was asked to complete a
form]
-- The public has a right to know. [But also: "have a right to know"]
-- The committee has not yet decided how they should react to the Governor's
letter. ^^^^
Yet another example from Quirk's awesomemegasuperbloated book (1,800 pages):
-- Danish bacon and eggs makes a good solid English breakfast. [A single meal]
-- Danish bacon and eggs sell very well in London.
<snip>
Since English has a reduced morphology (no declensions; almost no
conjugation), certain people think that it is an easy (!) language. As you may
imagine, a good number of grammar rules (eg determiners, tense & aspect,
consecutio temporum, etc) are quite different in Italian. It is NOT easy to
"just sound natural". My only consolation being that nobody speaks English
perfectly. :-)
-- Salvo
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?999474828.3b92c68c38136>