[Essay] “this unusual instrument” with plural antecedents

[raymondaliasapollyon]

Woah, wait a second—that's rather controversial. Personally, I don't go with that at all. Syntax and morphology, yes, but phonology is quite different. And as somebody with a background in semantics, I would certainly not include semantics as part of grammar!

What theoretical camp do/did you belong to?

The series covers interfaces between core components of grammar, including syntax–morphology, syntax–semantics, syntax–phonology, syntax–pragmatics, ...

https://books.google.com.tw/books?i...rammar" semantics, syntax, morphology&f=false

Also see the definition of grammar on this publisher's website:

grammar

The mental representation of a speaker’s linguistic competence; what a speaker knows about a language, including its phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics and lexicon. A linguistic description of a speaker’s mental grammar.

http://www.cengage.com/cgi-wadswort...pter_number=1&resource_id=10&altname=Glossary

Maybe very slightly but it's still the wrong word. We sometime use the words acceptable/unacceptable on this website, which I'm not crazy about but which I think are much better words. Another way to express this is to say that something 'works' or 'doesn't work', which I think is very appropriate.

anomalous sentence


QUICK REFERENCE
A sentence that is syntactically well formed but semantically meaningless. The best-known example, suggested by the US linguist and philosopher (Avram) Noam Chomsky (born 1928), is Colourless green ideas sleep furiously.

http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095415248

May I ask what you are trying to do here with this thread, and on this forum generally? Are you really interested in learning something or is it that you wish to try to teach us something? Or maybe you enjoy having argumentative discussions about linguistics? Are you, or have you been, a linguistics student? May I ask to what level? I only ask these last two questions to better help myself and other members improve our answers.

I do hold an MA in linguistics, and I'm interested in various aspects of English that are not covered in ESL/EFL materials. Very often I need native speakers' judgments on particular sentences.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Number agreement between the subject and the verb is different from a shift in number, which is a phenomenon on the discourse level.

Of course they're different. But that begs the question. It still doesn't explain why you want the number of one sentence to agree with the number of another sentence.

There is no "rule" that compels anyone to do that. It would be unreasonably limiting, which is why we don't do it.

 

[raymondaliasapollyon]

Of course they're different. But that begs the question. It still doesn't explain why you want the number of one sentence to agree with the number of another sentence.

There is no "rule" that compels anyone to do that. It would be unreasonably limiting, which is why we don't do it.

Have you read any writing handbooks?
I think many, if not most, such handbooks caution against unnecessary shifts in person/number, tense, etc.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

. . . Very often I need native speakers' judgments on particular sentences.

But you're resisting our advice on what's correct and what isn't and why.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Have you read any writing handbooks?

That's not a constructive question.

I think many, if not most, such handbooks caution against unnecessary shifts in person/number, tense, etc.

The shift to your instrument in the second sentence is necessary. It allows the writer to introduce a new thought clearly, naturally, and grammatically.

Yes, there are countless ways for the writer to say it. This is the way the writer chose to say it. No convention was violated, no treaty was derailed, no sacred cow was skewered.

You're asking whether it's correct grammar and usage. To complete the circle: It is.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

. . . May I ask what you are trying to do here with this thread, and on this forum generally? Are you really interested in learning something or is it that you wish to try to teach us something? Or maybe you enjoy having argumentative discussions about linguistics? Are you, or have you been, a linguistics student? May I ask to what level? I only ask these last two questions to better help myself and other members improve our answers.

Those are good questions. I've done my best on this one and will sign off. Carry on!

 

[probus]

A lot of hard work by many people went into this discussion. Thanks to all who contributed. But we've done it to death now. I am closing this thread.