Dammit Molly, send me a freaking number I can reach you at. In fact, send me all the freaking numbers I can reach you at! I've had a grammar question that has been bothering me all afternoon
( Read more... )
" A piece of pepperoni pizza would satisfy his hunger.
The subject is built around the noun "piece," with the other words of the subject -- "a" and "of pepperoni pizza" -- modifying the noun. "Piece" is the simple subject.
Likewise, a predicate has at its centre a simple predicate, which is always the verb or verbs that link up with the subject. In the example we just considered, the simple predicate is "would satisfy" -- in other words, the verb of the sentence."
The function of "are" is the same in both sentences. "At", in the first sentence, is actually a dangling preposition; the sentence is gramatically incorrect because prepositions need subjects ("at the bar," "on the desk," etc.). But "are" functions as the simple predicate in both the sentences.
I'm at work all afternoon, with no access to a phone, so email is the best way to contact me (I'm always checking my email, heh). At night, I'm either at my dad's house or Joel's. I'll email you those (I am le e-paranoid about these things heh).
While I agree that "Tell me where you're at" sounds awful, I'm not so sure it's grammatically incorrect. Yes, "at" needs a subject, but I think it has one -- "where".
Though it may make me sound like a stuffy know-it-all, here's my reasoning:
"Tell me" can be removed without changing the meaning of the sentence. For example, I could say "Tell me why the sky is blue", which just a way of saying "Why is the sky blue?" without phrasing it interrogatively.
When you phrase it as a question, the original sentence "Tell me where you're at" becomes "Where are you at?", and now it's easier to see how "where" might be the subject of "at". In English, when we make a question, we move the subject to the beginning of the sentence, leaving behind an unspoken trace. So, even though when we say "Where are you at?", the word "where" comes first, its real ("deep-structure") location within the sentence is back where the trace is -- in this case, after the word "at", leaving it perfectly situated to be the subject of "at
( ... )
Hi Peter! How's your summer going? I can't wait to hear more about your trip!
*wishes she had her linguistics textbooks with her*
Everything you said is true, but "at" is still unnecessary. It's just reiterating the idea of location that was already described by the interrogative word "where". Also, "where are you" accomplishes asking about your current location without stranding the preposition. Preposition-stranding is still being debated as to whether it constitutes correct grammar or not, so it's probably best to avoid doing it until the linguists figure it out heh.
I <3 Noam Chomsky. He's effing brilliant. His work on identifying the Language Acquisition Device is one of the reasons I became interested in linguistics.
Speaking of Midwestern dialects: many of the Eastern Ohioans I've spoken with will say things like "the floor needs swept" or "the car needs fixed". I don't know whether it's a Midwestern thing, an Appalachian thing, or both, but it sure caught me by surprise. I still can't figure out the grammaticality of it.
" A piece of pepperoni pizza would satisfy his hunger.
The subject is built around the noun "piece," with the other words of the subject -- "a" and "of pepperoni pizza" -- modifying the noun. "Piece" is the simple subject.
Likewise, a predicate has at its centre a simple predicate, which is always the verb or verbs that link up with the subject. In the example we just considered, the simple predicate is "would satisfy" -- in other words, the verb of the sentence."
(http://www.arts.uottawa.ca/writcent/hypergrammar/subjpred.html)
Reply
Reply
I'm at work all afternoon, with no access to a phone, so email is the best way to contact me (I'm always checking my email, heh). At night, I'm either at my dad's house or Joel's. I'll email you those (I am le e-paranoid about these things heh).
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Though it may make me sound like a stuffy know-it-all, here's my reasoning:
"Tell me" can be removed without changing the meaning of the sentence. For example, I could say "Tell me why the sky is blue", which just a way of saying "Why is the sky blue?" without phrasing it interrogatively.
When you phrase it as a question, the original sentence "Tell me where you're at" becomes "Where are you at?", and now it's easier to see how "where" might be the subject of "at". In English, when we make a question, we move the subject to the beginning of the sentence, leaving behind an unspoken trace. So, even though when we say "Where are you at?", the word "where" comes first, its real ("deep-structure") location within the sentence is back where the trace is -- in this case, after the word "at", leaving it perfectly situated to be the subject of "at ( ... )
Reply
*wishes she had her linguistics textbooks with her*
Everything you said is true, but "at" is still unnecessary. It's just reiterating the idea of location that was already described by the interrogative word "where". Also, "where are you" accomplishes asking about your current location without stranding the preposition. Preposition-stranding is still being debated as to whether it constitutes correct grammar or not, so it's probably best to avoid doing it until the linguists figure it out heh.
I <3 Noam Chomsky. He's effing brilliant. His work on identifying the Language Acquisition Device is one of the reasons I became interested in linguistics.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment