Laurie4b Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Prompt: None of the neighbors offered his support. Book's edit: None of the neighbors offered their support. " None" is the subject and is singular, so why would the possessive pronoun be plural? Prompt: That was Yusaf and me whom you saw. Book's edit: That was Yusef and I whom you saw. I thought the prompt was correct. I realize that the That= I is what they are going for, but the "whom you saw" seems to require the "me." What say the grammar mavens? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perry Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Prompt: None of the neighbors offered his support. Book's edit: None of the neighbors offered their support. " None" is the subject and is singular, so why would the possessive pronoun be plural? Prompt: That was Yusaf and me whom you saw. Book's edit: That was Yusef and I whom you saw. I thought the prompt was correct. I realize that the That= I is what they are going for, but the "whom you saw" seems to require the "me." What say the grammar mavens? I would think since "none" is being used as a collective noun, it would use a plural verb. This is what wiki says: Nominally singular pronouns can be collective nouns taking plural verbs, according to the same rules that apply to other collective nouns. For example, it is correct British English or American English usage to say: "None are so fallible as those who are sure they're right." In this case, the plural verb is used because the context for "none" suggests more than one thing or person.[1] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KidsHappen Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 I would think since "none" is being used as a collective noun, it would use a plural verb. This is what wiki says: I concur. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardening momma Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Prompt: That was Yusaf and me whom you saw. Book's edit: That was Yusef and I whom you saw. I thought the prompt was correct. I realize that the That= I is what they are going for, but the "whom you saw" seems to require the "me." "Whom you saw" is a modifier (or something like that--I can't remember grammar terms like that anymore--will get to it in a few years :) ). So you could take that off (and Yusaf as well) and still have a complete sentence: "That was I." That's the only part you'd look at to determine if it should be me/I. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matryoshka Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Hm. In the first sentence, I think like you that "none" is the antecedent and the pronoun should be "his" (even though I get cheeky sometimes and think that "their" should be officially accepted as a the singular neuter pronoun, as English doesn't have one and really could use one, that is not the official viewpoint - his (or her) it must be). I think what they're suggesting is that "neighbors", the object of the preposition, is the antecedent, rather than the subject "none", and I am unclear if this is kosher - can't remember if that is a big no-no or acceptable in some cases. Okay - I just read the others answers that posted while I was typing this, and what they say makes sense. :) In the second sentence, they're right. It has two clauses - "That was Yusef and I" and "whom you saw" - ie "you saw whom". Whom is the direct object of "you saw" and "I" is part of the compound predicate nominative of "that was". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orthodox6 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 I'm no grammarian. I'm just so old that I was taught "old school English" ! Prompt: None of the neighbors offered his support. Book's edit: None of the neighbors offered their support. " None" is the subject and is singular, so why would the possessive pronoun be plural? Disagree with the foregoing. "None" is a substitute for "Not one", thus is singular. The sentence should read, "None of the neighbors offered his support." "His" refers to the antecedent "none". Prompt: That was Yusaf and me whom you saw. Book's edit: That was Yusef and I whom you saw. I thought the prompt was correct. I realize that the That= I is what they are going for, but the "whom you saw" seems to require the "me." Agree with the foregoing this time. Temporarily sink Yusef (spelling ?) and the sentence should read, "That was I whom you saw." This sentence could be recast as, "I was that [person] whom you saw." The word "person" is "understood", to use the grammar lingo. Now say aloud to yourself, "Me was that whom you saw." The odd sound of that should persuade you that the book is correct. . . . Yusef may come back now. "That was Yusef and I whom you saw." Recast the sentence as, "Yusef and I were [those people] whom you saw." It won't "work" to say, "Yusef and me were those [people] whom you saw." (The use of "were" is inevitable with the recast because of the plural subject.) The book's example correctly may use the singular verb "was" because the word "that" holds sway as the subject, in the form of the sentence provided. What say the grammar mavens? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie4b Posted September 2, 2009 Author Share Posted September 2, 2009 I would think since "none" is being used as a collective noun, it would use a plural verb. This is what wiki says: I can see that in the Wiki sentence, but I had always thought that when a word like "none" is followed by a prepositional phrase "of the neighbors" that you essentially ignored the prepositional phrase and used "none" as the subject. Is that not correct? And in the sentence in the book, "None" actually means "Not one." Wouldn't that work like "each"? ie Each of the neighbors offered his support. Or None of the neighbors offered his support. Trying to understand the difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie4b Posted September 2, 2009 Author Share Posted September 2, 2009 "Whom you saw" is a modifier (or something like that--I can't remember grammar terms like that anymore--will get to it in a few years :) ). So you could take that off (and Yusaf as well) and still have a complete sentence: "That was I." That's the only part you'd look at to determine if it should be me/I. Ok. That makes sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie4b Posted September 2, 2009 Author Share Posted September 2, 2009 I'm no grammarian. I'm just so old that I was taught "old school English" ! Thanks. That was very clear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie4b Posted September 2, 2009 Author Share Posted September 2, 2009 Hm. In the first sentence, I think like you that "none" is the antecedent and the pronoun should be "his" (even though I get cheeky sometimes and think that "their" should be officially accepted as a the singular neuter pronoun, as English doesn't have one and really could use one, that is not the official viewpoint - his (or her) it must be). I think what they're suggesting is that "neighbors", the object of the preposition, is the antecedent, rather than the subject "none", and I am unclear if this is kosher - can't remember if that is a big no-no or acceptable in some cases. Okay - I just read the others answers that posted while I was typing this, and what they say makes sense. :) In the second sentence, they're right. It has two clauses - "That was Yusef and I" and "whom you saw" - ie "you saw whom". Whom is the direct object of "you saw" and "I" is part of the compound predicate nominative of "that was". I agree--we desperately need neuter pronouns. I get soooo tired of writing he or she, or alternating he and she, or his/her, etc. etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orthodox6 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 I agree with you all ! (casting my vote there for restoration of the 2nd person plural, as exists in foreign languages ! :) ) In informal writing -- such as posts to this board -- I routinely cut corners and type "s/he" instead of "he or she". I agree--we desperately need neuter pronouns. I get soooo tired of writing he or she, or alternating he and she, or his/her, etc. etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In The Great White North Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Prompt: None of the neighbors offered his support. Book's edit: None of the neighbors offered their support. " None" is the subject and is singular, so why would the possessive pronoun be plural? "his" is the older correct version - what my mom was taught in the 1940's. "their" is the politically correct version - presumably because "none" might be a man or a woman. Prompt: That was Yusaf and me whom you saw. Book's edit: That was Yusef and I whom you saw. I thought the prompt was correct. I realize that the That= I is what they are going for, but the "whom you saw" seems to require the "me." "I" is correct. It is the predicate nominative, indicated by the copulative verb "was". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 I agree with Orthodox6. There is dissent among the ranks on the first point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orthodox6 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Politically correct ?!?!?!?!?! Is that documented somewhere ? Always, always I have understood this use of "their" to exhibit the sloppy non-standards promoted in today's culture -- never that there was anything "P.C." about it. . . . Filed along with "like I said". :001_smile: "his" is the older correct version - what my mom was taught in the 1940's. "their" is the politically correct version - presumably because "none" might be a man or a woman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibraryLover Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Very helpful exchange! Thank you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gardening momma Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 (edited) "I" is correct. It is the predicate nominative, indicated by the copulative verb "was". That's Greek to me. And we're not planning to learn Greek. Latin or Spanish or both, but not Greek. :D Edited September 2, 2009 by gardening momma grammar...since this is a grammar thread. :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In The Great White North Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Politically correct ?!?!?!?!?! Is that documented somewhere ? Always, always I have understood this use of "their" to exhibit the sloppy non-standards promoted in today's culture -- never that there was anything "P.C." about it. . . . Filed along with "like I said". :001_smile: I don't know about documented. I was taught that in college. First it became "his or her," then it morphed into "their." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orthodox6 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 That's Greek to me. And we're not planning to learn Greek. Latin or Spanish or both, but not Greek. :D Po Po Po ! :D (That was Greek, transliterated.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovedtodeath Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Politically correct ?!?!?!?!?! Is that documented somewhere ? Always, always I have understood this use of "their" to exhibit the sloppy non-standards promoted in today's culture -- never that there was anything "P.C." about it. . . . Filed along with "like I said". :001_smile: SWB has a lengthy explanation of why she uses he and she alternately instead of they. I don't remember exactly where it is located, but I did read it. To summarize: Using they is considered correct for the time we live in, but she will not accept it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stripe Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 I prefer to try to pluralize it. I am not a "he" and I don't like to be referred to in the masculine. I am proud of my son for regularly saying "he or she" and "his or her," but then, he is bilingual in a language that does have a neuter pronoun, which English sorely needs, but the creation of which would likely spark howls of protest about international conspiracies and so forth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JudyJudyJudy Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 I'm no grammarian. I'm just so old that I was taught "old school English"! Originally Posted by Laurie4b Prompt: None of the neighbors offered his support. Book's edit: None of the neighbors offered their support. " None" is the subject and is singular, so why would the possessive pronoun be plural? Disagree with the foregoing. "None" is a substitute for "Not one", thus is singular. The sentence should read, "None of the neighbors offered his support." "His" refers to the antecedent "none". Prompt: That was Yusaf and me whom you saw. Book's edit: That was Yusef and I whom you saw. I thought the prompt was correct. I realize that the That= I is what they are going for, but the "whom you saw" seems to require the "me." Agree with the foregoing this time. Temporarily sink Yusef (spelling ?) and the sentence should read, "That was I whom you saw." This sentence could be recast as, "I was that [person] whom you saw." The word "person" is "understood", to use the grammar lingo. Now say aloud to yourself, "Me was that whom you saw." The odd sound of that should persuade you that the book is correct. . . . Yusef may come back now. "That was Yusef and I whom you saw." Recast the sentence as, "Yusef and I were [those people] whom you saw." It won't "work" to say, "Yusef and me were those [people] whom you saw." (The use of "were" is inevitable with the recast because of the plural subject.) The book's example correctly may use the singular verb "was" because the word "that" holds sway as the subject, in the form of the sentence provided. What say the grammar mavens? I agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nmoira Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 I don't know about documented. I was taught that in college. First it became "his or her," then it morphed into "their."According the The Shorter Oxford, "they" used as a singular pronoun has been documented since late Middle English, and "their" since Middle English. They: 4 In relation to a singular noun or pronoun of undetermined gender: he or she. LME. Scott Fitzgerald Ask anybody for Gordon Skerrett and they'll point him out to you. Their: 2 In relation to a singular noun or pronoun of undetermined gender: his or her. ME. Oxford Times A trustworthy…person with the ability to work on their own initiative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.