Actually, my question is whether the sentence "The brain has two halves and ARE COVERED with thin layers of membrane" grammatically sound, if so, why?
I don't think it is... Haven't seen anything like that.
omission of words-online and waiting
Moderator: EC
-
GiddyGad
- Rising Star
- Posts: 100
- Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:03 pm
- Location: Russia
In theory I think it's possible to consider your sentence with two Predicates and one Subject as two sentences with one Subject but it doesn't help because they both are tied to the same Subject and conjugated (in Person and Number) in accordance with it...
I'd rather say, the Predicate determines the Person and the Number of the Subject - in English the Subject being Singular may be considered as Plural if the Predicate is Plural: "My family are..."; "The police are after the criminal..." et al. Variants like "I says to him..." are also possible, though may be considered colloquial or improper...
I'd rather say, the Predicate determines the Person and the Number of the Subject - in English the Subject being Singular may be considered as Plural if the Predicate is Plural: "My family are..."; "The police are after the criminal..." et al. Variants like "I says to him..." are also possible, though may be considered colloquial or improper...
-
Pirate
- Rising Star
- Posts: 202
- Joined: Sun Nov 16, 2003 6:58 am
- Status: Learner of English
- Location: Vietnam
Yes you are right!imnobrainer wrote: I thought "The brain has two halves and is covered with thin layers of membrane" is a compound sentence made up of two independant clauses, i.e. "The brain has two halves", "The brain is covered with thin layers of membrane" joined by the conjunction "and", with " the brain" omitted in the second principal clause as repetitive.
And "The brain has two halves which are covered with thin layers of membrane" is a complex sentence, having only one main clause: "The brain has two halves"
No, this sentence is not correct. If you want to shorten the complex sentence, there'll be no "and":imnobrainer wrote:Actually, my question is whether the sentence "The brain has two halves and ARE COVERED with thin layers of membrane" grammatically sound, if so, why?
Any other opinions?
The brain has two halves COVERED with thin layers of membrane.
-
GiddyGad
- Rising Star
- Posts: 100
- Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:03 pm
- Location: Russia
Re: with two Predicates and one Subject
If I take it right, you think my comments are too complex, frustrating, and daunting, don't you? Well, maybe... Sometimes it does take time and efforts to persuade students to look for harmony, not rules, in a foreign language. Those who believe in rules have to ask a lot of unnecessary questions. Conversely, those who see the harmony can deduce any rules themselves.GiddyGad, thank you for you posts. Now I truely appreciate why mastery of a second language is a frustrating and daunting task, particularly the English language.
If you analyse most frequent students' mistakes, if you take into account students' so common inability to express themselves in word (not just to say something) you'll understand that learning a language in tables and rules just doesn't work. Whatever the rules say, I know the advantages of my approach. It's much better supported by English texts - books, articles, etc., than grammars and dictionaries.
Anyway, it's not a help board I've intruded, is it?
-
GiddyGad
- Rising Star
- Posts: 100
- Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:03 pm
- Location: Russia
Re: with two Predicates and one Subject
Imnobrainer,
One evident example of the profanation imposed by modern grammar books is the Conditional Mood. I hope you will agree that we speak of a phenomenon only in case it cannot be referred to as another already existing one.
Indeed, such sentence as:"If the weather is fine I will go to the park," seems irregular for Indicative Mood and should be introduced as a specific Mood - Conditional... if (only if!) there is future tense in English.
F.R. Palmer wrote in 1976:"...Formally English has two tenses only, past and present as in love and loved. All other so-called tenses are composite forms involving auxiliary verbs, was loving, will love, etc.; these are not strictly part of the 'basic' tense system (and in this sense English has no future tense).
If we admit that there's no future tense in English the sentense: "If the weather is fine I will go to the park," will become regular. Moreover, we can use modal verbs (e.g. will, should) in the conditional clause as well. They will introduce new shades to the picture. The point is that we use Modal verbs when we need them, don't we? A condition doesn't always reguire our attitude to it.
Thus a sentence: "If the weather will be fine I will go to the park" does have sense and is regular as well. Try other Modal verbs in the conditional clause and choose which will work and which will sound funny.
No Mood, no rule. Just harmony.
Yeah, explanations may differ. Do they tell on the resulting sentence? What is wrong is wrong, do you agree? There's a form, the given, which is considered correct; and there are explanations which should cover similar language phenomena, preferably without exclusions or introduction of new definitions.What I was saying is that the explanations I received from various sources vary. Each answer has its own way of analysing the sentence; thus, I was a bit confused and felt that even to understand the grammatical rules over a simple sentence is not an easy task.
One evident example of the profanation imposed by modern grammar books is the Conditional Mood. I hope you will agree that we speak of a phenomenon only in case it cannot be referred to as another already existing one.
Indeed, such sentence as:"If the weather is fine I will go to the park," seems irregular for Indicative Mood and should be introduced as a specific Mood - Conditional... if (only if!) there is future tense in English.
F.R. Palmer wrote in 1976:"...Formally English has two tenses only, past and present as in love and loved. All other so-called tenses are composite forms involving auxiliary verbs, was loving, will love, etc.; these are not strictly part of the 'basic' tense system (and in this sense English has no future tense).
If we admit that there's no future tense in English the sentense: "If the weather is fine I will go to the park," will become regular. Moreover, we can use modal verbs (e.g. will, should) in the conditional clause as well. They will introduce new shades to the picture. The point is that we use Modal verbs when we need them, don't we? A condition doesn't always reguire our attitude to it.
Thus a sentence: "If the weather will be fine I will go to the park" does have sense and is regular as well. Try other Modal verbs in the conditional clause and choose which will work and which will sound funny.
No Mood, no rule. Just harmony.