The Grammar Genie says hello!

[Tim-the-Hermit]

Here's a grammar essential: The difference between knowing your shit and knowing you're shit.



Jim

The Socialist v the Capitalist!

[NH Baritone]

Or from the observant cynics point of view, the differences between:

- Knowing their shit;
- Knowing they're shit; and
- Knowing "There! Shit!"

Here's a grammar essential: The difference between knowing your shit and knowing you're shit.



Jim

[Tim-the-Hermit]

Hi!

I managed to find an example of my not understanding the difference between 'has' and 'have.' From a news report:

"About 1 in 5 prisoners has a learning difficulty and up to one-third of all prisoners has a low IQ, research from the charity suggests.'

What different meaning would this have if 'have' was used instead of 'has'? I guess tense?

[OzAnt]

Hi Tim,

I'm not seeing it as a tense thing. Here's a look at how I'd think things through (it's a bit of a look into my mind, so I apologise in advance for the mess)...

Remembering the basics with pronouns:
I/you/we/they have
he/she/it has

I tend to look at nouns and see what type of pronoun they are:
My sister has really started to loathe TV (ie: she has really started to loathe TV)
My brothers have really started to loathe TV (ie: they have really started to loathe TV)

So, I'd ask myself how I'd pronounise (I'm sure that's a word... ) 'about 1 in 5 prisoners' and 'up to one-third of all prisoners'. To me, in both cases the obvious choice for such a collection is 'they'. As such, the sentence should read, "About one in five prisoners have a learning difficulty and up to one-third of all prisoners have a low IQ, research from the charity suggests.".

The only confusion arising in the mind of the author of the article, that I can think of, might have to do with the '1' near the start of the sentence. In other words, the author may have been pronounising (also a word...honest! ) 'about 1' (rather than 'about 1 in 5 prisoners'). This would make the choice 'he/she'. In other words, it seems to me that the author of the sentence may have been thinking, "About one prisoner in five has a learning difficulty...". Unfortunately, that's not what they actually wrote. Also, it doesn't explain how the author thought that it would be right to say "...and up to one-third of all prisoners has a low IQ...".

Wish I could have been more help there, Tim. Hopefully somebody else might be able to provide more info'.

Ant

[Tim-the-Hermit]

Thanks, Ant, that makes perfect sense and would explain why I was struggling to find examples of what was bothering me - it's only those rare occasions when the author is not sure whether s/he is referring to one person or more than one person. Must brush up on my pronounising!

[JustJim]

Hi, Tim...

Ant has it right. It's not about tense, it's about number. Singular nouns and pronouns used as subjects require verbs that agree in number, as do plural nouns and pronouns.

In the examples, "About 1 in 5 prisoners has a learning difficulty," and, "Up to one-third of all prisoners has a low IQ...," the subjects of the sentences are "1" (they probably should have spelled it out as "one") and "one-third". Both of those are singular nouns, and require "has" in order to agree in number. If they'd said "two in five prisoners" or "up to two-thirds of all prisoners," then the subjects would be plural, and they would need to use "have" to agree in number.

When you combine two things into a compound subject, like, "One in five prisoners and up to one-third of the prison guards have reading difficulties," then you need to use a plural number verb (in this case, "have").

Sometimes it's helpful to ask yourself, "Would I say 'one prisoner have', or 'one prisoner has'? (Of course, you'd say "has".)

It can get a lot more complicated than that, though, since some nouns can be either singular or plural (depending on usage) - like group, or family - and they can take either singular or plural number verbs, again depending on usage. And then there are singular words used as nouns like each, every, and none. They're always single, even when it doesn't "look" like it. It's never correct to say, "Each (of them) have blue shoes," or, "None (of them) have blue shoes." And if you use "or" between two single nouns, you still need a single verb, as in, "A black pen or a blue pen is needed." But if you use "and" between two single nouns, you'll need to use a plural verb, as in, "A black pen and a blue pen are needed."

As I say, it can get very complicated....

Hope that helps!

Jim

[JustJim]

As an aside, as I reflect on my life, I've never had any problems knowing what was right or wrong grammatically, even when there was no way I could have explained why something was wrong or right and didn't know any of the "rules" of grammar. The way I knew what was right or wrong was that it "sounded" right or "sounded" wrong. And that, I'm certain, stemmed from the fact that both of my parents spoke grammatically correct English in our home as I was growing up. I never heard incorrect English being spoken, so when I finally did hear it, it just didn't sound right. That helped me ace all my English classes all the way through school, and contributes heavily to my frequent minor irritation when I hear people speak grammatically incorrectly. (I live in southern Ohio, so that happens all the time.)

I wonder how much of a difference it makes for deaf people to develop a "sense" of grammatical correctness if they don't "hear" people speaking correctly or incorrectly. Hmmm....

I saw a quote the other day that said, "Whenever I hear a sentence beginning with the words, "I seen...," I know it will never be followed immediately by, "...the inside of a book."

Jim

[Tim-the-Hermit]

Thanks Jim, that's a really useful post for me. I probably won't remember it all, but that doesn't matter as I can always revisit this thread if I'm not sure about something. I think I picked up reasonably competent grammar from reading at school. Luckily, like you, I can now usually sense when something doesn't sound right, (or read right in my case!)

Good thread!

[OzAnt]

In the examples, "About 1 in 5 prisoners has a learning difficulty," and, "Up to one-third of all prisoners has a low IQ...," the subjects of the sentences are "1" (they probably should have spelled it out as "one") and "one-third". Both of those are singular nouns, and require "has" in order to agree in number.

Actually, it appears we agree on everything, except this. I would argue that the subject is prisoners and we're talking about more than one of them, which is why I wrote what I wrote. I wonder if that's an American/Australian thing? Or perhaps there's a a certain leeway in interpretation of what constitutes the subject(s)?

In terms of knowing if it sounds right or wrong (see further on), I gotta say that, "Up to one-third of all prisoners has a low IQ...," in particularly, just sounds wrong to me (NOTE: one-third translates to 0.3 in my mind and I was under the impression that non whole numbers require 'have' (eg: "Half the prisoners have a learning difficulty..."), so it could be that).

My ears will allow, "About one in five prisoners has a learning difficulty...", probably because as I suggested in my previous post, I think that's just a poorly worded way of saying, "About one prisoner in five has a learning difficulty..." but they're not entirely happy.

As an aside, as I reflect on my life, I've never had any problems knowing what was right or wrong grammatically, even when there was no way I could have explained why something was wrong or right and didn't know any of the "rules" of grammar. The way I knew what was right or wrong was that it "sounded" right or "sounded" wrong. And that, I'm certain, stemmed from the fact that both of my parents spoke grammatically correct English in our home as I was growing up. I never heard incorrect English being spoken, so when I finally did hear it, it just didn't sound right. That helped me ace all my English classes all the way through school, and contributes heavily to my frequent minor irritation when I hear people speak grammatically incorrectly.

I too breezed through all my English classes, for the same, albeit manufactured circumstances. When I started school I didn't know a word of English. Seriously. The only languages I knew at that point were Italian and Serbian. I hadn't quite turned five yet and I was walked to school by mum. I still remember mum taking my hand out of hers and placing into the hand of an entity that appeared human but sounded alien. And I remember being terrified. I can laugh about it now, but at the time, the more she spoke, in what were no doubt supposed to be soothing tones and words, the more distraught I became. Also, I have vivid memories of the process my teacher went through to teach me English and how the language seemed to fall into place simply through exposure and a very real need to understand.

My parents had the forethought to specifically not speak any English at home so that they wouldn't taint any English I learnt. Dad (Italian), learnt mum's native language (Serbian) and vice versa. Mum was particularly adept at languages (she could speak Serbian, German, Italian, Macedonian, Turkish, Greek, Russian and English) which no doubt made it easier for her to realise that if she wanted me to learn English without an accent and grammatical errors, I shouldn't be learning it from her as she had learnt it relatively recently. But she knew where to source good English. I was placed in front of the TV every flamin' evening for the news with the now late presenter, James Dibble. As it turns out, the man did indeed speak with award winning clear diction and impeccable grammar but maaaaaaan, did I learn to hate news time!

So, yeah... I hear you, Jim. The only thing I'd add, is that in my experience, it made me lax with learning the rules because I kind of felt like it was a waste of time. Same with spelling. Learning how to spell a word came easily to me. Well, certainly easier than trying to follow the damn rules on spelling and all their associated exceptions (eg: i before e, except after c... oh, wait... AND except for the following list of words...).

Ant

[OzAnt]

Actually, while I'm here...

Can anybody explain why, more and more frequently, customer service personnel when asking for your name, utter the words, "What was your name?" I'm finding it increasingly irritating and as a result I've become what some customer service personnel would consider to be a more difficult customer. For example:

Me: Hi, I'd like to make an appointment.
Reception: Certainly, and what was your name?
Me: I don't know.
Reception: Ummm... I'll need a name, sir.
Me: Why? You appear to already have a name. Your name tag indicates that it's Alyshea. A perfectly lovely name.
Reception: I'll need YOUR name.
Me: Ah, well, the best I can do is give you my CURRENT name.
Reception: That will be fine.
Me: Why, then, did you not ask for that?
Reception: I believe I did.
Me: No, you didn't. Your exact phrase was, "...and what WAS your name". This indicates that either I've had at least one other name in the past or perhaps more worryingly, that I appear deceased.
Reception: (blank stare)
Me: Look. My point is that if you want to know what my name IS, don't ask me what my name WAS. My name IS Anthony...

So... Any ideas? Does it even happen outside Australia?!?

Ant

[gary_s]

That's a funny story. Don't think I've ever encountered it. It would probably drive me crazy, too. I have a tiny stroke every time someone asks me for my PIN number. Arrrrg!

[JustJim]

In the examples, "About 1 in 5 prisoners has a learning difficulty," and, "Up to one-third of all prisoners has a low IQ...," the subjects of the sentences are "1" (they probably should have spelled it out as "one") and "one-third". Both of those are singular nouns, and require "has" in order to agree in number.

Actually, it appears we agree on everything, except this. I would argue that the subject is prisoners and we're talking about more than one of them, which is why I wrote what I wrote. I wonder if that's an American/Australian thing? Or perhaps there's a a certain leeway in interpretation of what constitutes the subject(s)?

The phrase "in 5 prisoners" is a prepositional phrase describing "1". The subject is "1". "About" also describes "1". If you diagram it out, you'll see it. If you remove all the descriptors ('about' and 'in 5 prisoners'), you'll be left with "1 has a learning difficulty". To say "1 have a difficulty" would be wrong. And it would hurt your ears.

In terms of knowing if it sounds right or wrong (see further on), I gotta say that, "Up to one-third of all prisoners has a low IQ...," in particularly, just sounds wrong to me (NOTE: one-third translates to 0.3 in my mind and I was under the impression that non whole numbers require 'have' (eg: "Half the prisoners have a learning difficulty..."), so it could be that).

Yeah, it sounds weird to me sometimes, too. But "one"-third makes the number of thirds singular (there is only one of them), so the verb has to be singular, too. Also, "half" can be one of those either/or words like group or family. But when "half" refers to a single item (like half a pound), then you'd use "has" with it. When it refers to a plurality of items (like half the prisoners), then you'd use "have" with it.

My ears will allow, "About one in five prisoners has a learning difficulty...", probably because as I suggested in my previous post, I think that's just a poorly worded way of saying, "About one prisoner in five has a learning difficulty..." but they're not entirely happy.

LOL!

So, yeah... I hear you, Jim. The only thing I'd add, is that in my experience, it made me lax with learning the rules because I kind of felt like it was a waste of time. Same with spelling. Learning how to spell a word came easily to me. Well, certainly easier than trying to follow the damn rules on spelling and all their associated exceptions (eg: i before e, except after c... oh, wait... AND except for the following list of words...).

I'm so impressed with your language background and how extremely well you've managed it! I was just like you in being lax with learning the rules, since I already "knew" what was right and wrong, so why do I need to why? Spelling, though, was always easy for me. I was a Detroit Metropolitan Spelling Bee Grade Champion in 1958, and I still have the embossed dictionary I won for that. It's the first Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary! It doesn't have a LOT of the words we use now in it!

Jim

[JustJim]

So... Any ideas? Does it even happen outside Australia?!?

LOL! What a great story! You're so clever, Ant. You should write books that make people think and laugh....

I haven't had that particular thing happen to me, but lots of similar things drive me nuts. I think it's a European thing, for example, not to use qualifiers with words like hospital. In the USA, except where people have been somehow corrupted by European influences, we usually say, "I was in THE hospital." It grates on my ears to hear people say, "I was in hospital." Maybe it's just my Michigan upbringing, though I travelled all over the world with people from all over the USA, and NONE of them ever said, "Take him to hospital."

On the other hand, we don't use those qualifiers with "school" or "church". We say, "Take him to school," or, "Let's go to church."

Strange, huh?

Jim

[gary_s]

How about what happens when we break the law...we go to jail. But when we want to read a book for free, we go to the library.

[Moonwood the Hare]

Actually, while I'm here...

Can anybody explain why, more and more frequently, customer service personnel when asking for your name, utter the words, "What was your name?" I'm finding it increasingly irritating and as a result I've become what some customer service personnel would consider to be a more difficult customer. For example:

Me: Hi, I'd like to make an appointment.
Reception: Certainly, and what was your name?
Me: I don't know.
Reception: Ummm... I'll need a name, sir.
Me: Why? You appear to already have a name. Your name tag indicates that it's Alyshea. A perfectly lovely name.
Reception: I'll need YOUR name.
Me: Ah, well, the best I can do is give you my CURRENT name.
Reception: That will be fine.
Me: Why, then, did you not ask for that?
Reception: I believe I did.
Me: No, you didn't. Your exact phrase was, "...and what WAS your name". This indicates that either I've had at least one other name in the past or perhaps more worryingly, that I appear deceased.
Reception: (blank stare)
Me: Look. My point is that if you want to know what my name IS, don't ask me what my name WAS. My name IS Anthony...

So... Any ideas? Does it even happen outside Australia?!?

Ant

I sometimes ask people what their name was. This is when they already told me and I didn't catch it and I don't want to say what is your name as they could then think or say, 'I just told you.'

I had one the other day where I needed to pass on a message and I said do you have a number the person can contact you on. And the other person said yes. There was a long pause then they said, 'Do you want me to give it you?' Probably some relative of yours Ant!