is it:
"The entire situation was like a puzzle WHOSE pieces floated indistinctly in a haze of questions"
or
"The entire situation was like a puzzle WHO'S pieces floated indistinctly in a haze of questions"
I can't believe I'm stuck on that! lol
The Grammar Query Thread!
is it:
"The entire situation was like a puzzle WHOSE pieces floated indistinctly in a haze of questions"
or
"The entire situation was like a puzzle WHO'S pieces floated indistinctly in a haze of questions"
I can't believe I'm stuck on that! lol
You would use the word WHOSE. This is the possessive case of who or which used as an adjective........WHO'S is a contradiction of who is or of who has.......I hope this helps.
Contraction of who is perhaps? lolOriginally Posted by Artistic Wizard
ah, yes. Thank you kindly.
For those really tricky little ones like "(sentence)" - do I use 'practise' or 'practice'?
Or Tblues /Tblue's /Tblues'
I know there are varying levels of grammar ability around, and what is basic to one is not so to another.
I'm not that bad at English, but the two above are the sorts of things I often get caught by!
Maybe a grammar forum with a FAQ? (updated whenever something useful comes up?)
I'm not advocating it as a "Here's my paragraph, check my spelling" place (dictionaries and spell checkers are for that), but rather a forum for those who actively seek to get things right.
Anyway - just thought it might be a useful thing?
i before e except after c, and all that!
Not a bad idea.
If it was in the writing forum, it would quickly get overrun, so a separate forum makes sense....
Maybe, when the grammar issue in question was resolved, the thread would be closed. The Subject lines of the thread would have to be very descriptive to avoid unneccessary duplication.
The hard-headed answer would be that writers should deal with that on their own, but I am not that hard-headed.
I guess the key thing would be how much work was involved in mods renaming the threads, closing them once completed, and then making sure that people dont post the same subject.
Like I said, not a bad idea at all, just a question of how much admin work is invovled for the mods...
There's no reason why this can't be done in this very thread, in the Writing section. There's no need to keep starting new ones for each query. So, if you have any grammar queries, bring them on and discuss them here. Oh, and in keeping with the writing theme, this thread is now a sticky in the Writing section.
To start it off, Forrest's very good query has been merged here as well.
Grammar, the bane of my life.
I think this idea is great. Grammar has always been my weakness. I am relearning skills I let slip nearly thirty years ago. (you don't need much grammar when you crunch numbers all day.) I kept enough to draft notes and lettes for typists and left the rest up to them...
Grammar can be a tool to alter the tone of a piece.
This is a skill I want to develop to the full if a can...
Well, if someone could explain the whys and wherefores of:
Tblues/Tblue's/Tblues' apostrophe and "s", I'd appreciate it!
I know about the "Tblue is" contraction (Tblue's), but say I'm talking about something of mine - Tblue's cat? Is that right?
And how would the other situations of "apostrophe S" apply?
Thanks
Tblue's cat is right.
Tblues would be plural.
And if you would be called Tblues not Tblue, than it would be Tblues' cat. Also, if all the Tblues in the world have one cat it would be Tblues' cat as well.
One more example: Julia's cat, but Jules' cat.
Sorry that I can't explain it, hope you understand it anyway.
Strunk and White's The Elements of Style states you should always use an 's no matter the ending of the word. Jules's cat.Tblue's cat is right.
Tblues would be plural.
And if you would be called Tblues not Tblue, than it would be Tblues' cat. Also, if all the Tblues in the world have one cat it would be Tblues' cat as well.
One more example: Julia's cat, but Jules' cat.
Sorry that I can't explain it, hope you understand it anyway.
They do mention exceptions (here), but you're right: they would have us write, "Jules's cat". If you like that better, use it. But what Nimea says isn't wrong (I for one prefer that usage).
Strunk and White aren't especially known for their tolerance for usage other than their own. Personally, I wish Strunk's booklet had faded into obscurity instead of being picked up by White, edited and published. People quote it to justify a lot of nonsense corrections.
It's a style guide, just like any other. Honestly, unless someone points out an error, the error isn't there. If people read over the "error" without stopping, it isn't much of an error.
People are going to understand the possessive meaning of Jules' and Jules's, either way. I like the Strunk and White guide myself. I think it is a safe, non superflouse way of writing. I can't claim to adhere to it one hundred percent. But I think it is a good place to start.
But people can pull from many grammatical sources to justify corrections that they deem important. Most grammar text books are harder to follow than Strunk and White's guide. I highly recommend it.
This is driving me nuts...no one I ask knows. Sorry if it's been posted; I don't have time to read all those.
Would I say "All (noun)s are not (adjective)" or "Not all (noun)s are (adj.)"?
It seems to me that, although I see the first used a lot, the second would make more sense. The first seems to imply that because ALL (noun)s are (adj) no (noun)s are (adj)'s opposite. E.G.:
"All Vietnamese are not bad" or
"Not all Vietnamese are bad"?
I like that attitude.
Agree. But it's a matter of style, really. It's not so much the book that riles me, but that many people refer to it as an authority.I like the Strunk and White guide myself. I think it is a safe, non superflouse way of writing.
That's okay. Neither do Strunk and White. It's fun to correct them with their own guide. You should try it once.I can't claim to adhere to it one hundred percent.
Well, as you said it's a style guide. You're not going to learn grammar from it. Actually, if you don't know grammar, what are you going to make of this sentence, in "Use the Active Voice"?But people can pull from many grammatical sources to justify corrections that they deem important. Most grammar text books are harder to follow than Strunk and White's guide. I highly recommend it.
How many of Srunk's readers know what a "transitive" is? And how does it relate to the "active voice"? (And where is the lively active voice in this sentence? Is this one of the "exceptions" they point out?)
You won't learn grammar from S&W; for that you'll still need the harder-to-follow text books.
I wouldn't advise saying "Not all Vietnamese are bad," as it may include an implied admission that most are.
"All Vietnamese are not bad," sounds like a passionate reprisal to a often heared and just repeated stereotype. Syntactically, "all Vietnamese" would have to be treated somewhat like "The Vietnamese, as a group, are not bad." It's unusual syntax, but apparantly it happens. (Notice that you have to emphasise the "not" to make the sentence work.)
The two sentences don't sound equivalent. The first makes you sound like a jovial racist, the second one like an easily riled activist (exaggerated for clarity).
There's always the option of saying: "Most Vietnamese are not bad."
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks