Grammar Q's and A's

[PeaceBlondie]

Okay, I'm going to bite the bullet, go out on a limb, throw my hat in the ring, take a chance....and start a topic about that terrible subject that bothers us all, English grammar.

Post your questions and what you think are the answers, here, please. And please don't flame anybody unless they're a native speaker pretending to be an expert, and you've got a Ph.D. in English grammar, using flawless writen English in your posts. Okay?

Let me start with one of the three problem areas which, if written incorrectly when I was in my senior year of high school, would have earned me a perfect zero (failure) on an essay:

Its, it's. The word without an apostrophe its is a personal pronoun (pronominal adjective), referring to "something that belongs to it." Example: the door fell off its hinges. The word with the apostrophe, it's - well, it's a contracted form meaning it is. It's hard to describe.

A thing does not have it's money. Please realize that most readers will see the apostrophe and assume you've just written the short form of 'it is.'

Feel free to offer your opinion. Or ask the question. Let's make this educational, and more or less painless.

Should you say "Did you eat?" or "Have you eaten?" Is there any difference in your home country between "I will do it" and "I am going to do it"? Does it matter if you end a sentence with a preposition when you want to hang around? Will a particple die if it dangles or is misplaced? Who, me? Whom, I?

[endure]

I have no problem with its and it's because I was taught that an apostrophe replaces a missing letter. What I do have a problem with is when it's necessary to put an apostrophe at the end of a word. Is it something to do with plurals?

[endure]

Is there any difference in your home country between "I will do it" and "I am going to do it"?

'I will do it' implies (to me) that it is something I intend to do at some time in the future. "I am going to do it" implies that I'm off to do it right now.

[PeaceBlondie]

Is there any difference in your home country between "I will do it" and "I am going to do it"?

'I will do it' implies (to me) that it is something I intend to do at some time in the future. "I am going to do it" implies that I'm off to do it right now.

That's interesting, endure, because you're English. TEFLers from England tell me insistently that "I will do it" (spoken with no special inflection or emphasis) is definite, whilst "I am going to do it" is uncertain or indefinite. In American English, I'm 99% sure that there is no difference whatsoever.

[PeaceBlondie]

I have no problem with its and it's because I was taught that an apostrophe replaces a missing letter. What I do have a problem with is when it's necessary to put an apostrophe at the end of a word. Is it something to do with plurals?

Just one person's opinion (welcome, other people!) here:

Indeed, an apostrophe often replaces one or more missing letters. "I could've done that" is missing two letters of 'have.' But at other times, an apostrophe doesn't replace a missing letter. It can mean possession. If Tom Jones had a song, it's "Tom Jones's song." Or maybe "Tom Jones' song." His parents would be the Joneses, and their house might be 'the Joneses' house." It makes you pause to say it. That's a bad example, so how about "Tom's house" which doesn't mean that Tom is a house.

If you need a wrong example of it's that should be its, read about every fifth post on an internet forum. Even a teacher's forum. Or a teachers' forum.

[endure]

But isn't "Tom Jones's song" the same as "Tom Jones, his song" which is a 'missing letter' thing?

[PeaceBlondie]

But isn't "Tom Jones's song" the same as "Tom Jones, his song" which is a 'missing letter' thing?

Ah, yes, mayhaps, perchance in Perzance. If it makes you feel better, yes. Good point.

I guess what bothers me most is a sentence like "Inflation has strengthened it's rate of increase."

[the scouser]

Is there any difference in your home country between "I will do it" and "I am going to do it"?

'I will do it' implies (to me) that it is something I intend to do at some time in the future. "I am going to do it" implies that I'm off to do it right now.

To me "I will do it" means that it will definitely be done; whereas "I am going to do it" is a vague undertaking to perhaps, one day, as yet undetermined, get round to doing whatever it is that needs to be done.

My question: what's the difference between "perhaps" and "maybe"? Is it just a Brit/Septic thing?

Scouse.

[gpt]

Missing letters apostrophe - used to denote that one or more letters/numbers is missing - 'phone for telephone, '90's for 1990's. Although phone is now accepted in its own right.

Contracted apostrophe - It's for it is or it was, won't for will not.

Possessive adjectives -

Singular - 'noun' + apostrophe + 's': the boy's pen, the dog's bone.

Regular plural - 'noun' + apostrophe: the boys' teacher, irregular plurals use the apostrophe + 's': the children's xxxxx

Nouns ending in 's', in modern usage we can drop the last 's'. The house of the Jones family - the Jones' houses or the Jones's house.

The only possessive that does not use an apostrophe is 'its' for obvious reasons - 'it's' is being used as a contraction.

But isn't "Tom Jones's song" the same as "Tom Jones, his song" which is a 'missing letter' thing? It appears to be but it isn't! Tom Jones' song means 'the song of/by/sung by Tom Jones'. "Tom Jones, his song" is incomplete - try "Tom Jones, his song "She's a lady" was his biggest UK hit." but that sounds unwieldy but "Tom Jones' song "She's a lady" was his biggest UK hit." does not.

[Tarragona]

'I will do it' implies (to me) that it is something I intend to do at some time in the future. "I am going to do it" implies that I'm off to do it right now.

That's interesting, endure, because you're English. TEFLers from England tell me insistently that "I will do it" (spoken with no special inflection or emphasis) is definite, whilst "I am going to do it" is uncertain or indefinite. In American English, I'm 99% sure that there is no difference whatsoever.

The problem here is you are taking things without any context and you also seem to be assuming that each structure has one meaning or function. Both structures are used in a wide range of contexts, some of which overlap and some of which don't.

Edited November 21, 2006 by Tarragona

[Loaded]

Prediction with weak evidence:

"Thaksin's in trouble, I think he won't be prime minister again."

Prediction with strong evidence:

"Thaksin's in trouble, I think he's going to escape prison though!"

Definite future plan:

"I'm going to marry me a sexy beeetch."

Decision at the time of speaking:

"Which beeeetch do ya wont Loaded?"

"Em, I'll have the sexy one pleeeze"

Normally, we don't use 'Will' when we have already decided to do

something.

'Will" can also be used in these situations:

Offering to do something - "I'll help you with that Honey Pie"

Agreeing to do something - "OK, I'll pay for the dead buffalo"

Promising to do something - "I'll give you the money later Honey Pie"

Asking somebody to do something - "Will you pay for the buffalo's funeral as well tirak?"

[Neeranam]

Normally, we don't use 'Will' when we have already decided to do

something.

I'll be playing pool tonight , so don't phone me. After I finish, I'll have my dinner. Sounds ok to me.

What about 'I should do it', 'I shall do it'?

[gpt]

"I'm going to marry me a sexy beeetch." ?????????? Now what sort of English is that?

Edited November 22, 2006 by gpt

[Loaded]

"I'm going to marry me a sexy beeetch." ?????????? Now what sort of English is that?

meta language is mainly colloquial but target language (will/going to) form is correct. I assumed that would have been spotted.

[Simmo]

Is there any difference in your home country between "I will do it" and "I am going to do it"?

This example highlights what many otherwise good english teachers "don't get".

Language has NO meaning without context.

Depending on the situation in which these phrases are used, they could be used interchangeably or they could refer to an immediate timeframe or some indeterminate time.

[mbkudu]

lay, laid, laid; lie, lay, lain; lie, lied, lied Maybe I just need to get leid more often.

Edited November 23, 2006 by mbkudu

[PeaceBlondie]

Is there any difference in your home country between "I will do it" and "I am going to do it"?

This example highlights what many otherwise good english teachers "don't get".

Language has NO meaning without context.

Depending on the situation in which these phrases are used, they could be used interchangeably or they could refer to an immediate timeframe or some indeterminate time.

Thanks. I think you're the second one now to say that, without saying your home country. Could you give some examples, please?

The reason I ask is that, normally in the US, well educated people make little if any distinction between "I will do it" and "I am going to do it." Yet, at my first teaching job in Thailand, the master teacher (Thai) of English insisted that he'd been taught that "I will do it" implied certainty, and "I am going to do it" implied uncertainty. When I brought it up in another discussion, the Brits agreed with the Thai teacher, and the Americans didn't.

If by context, you mean other words in the sentence, Americans generally put an adverb of certitude, or inflect the verb: "I will definitely do it," "I am definitely going to do it," "I WILL do it," or "I AM going to do it." Are you aware of any national differences in usage among educated native speakers of English?

[the swagman]

From my understanding 'will do' is used when the intent is immediate, I will go the shops now, I'll do that. Or in the case of fixed future plans, 'i'll take the train to Bangkok. 'am going to' is when we have planned or thought about the action previously. I'm going to see her, tomorrow.

And yes, words have no meaning without context.

[Tarragona]

So how does everyone feel about these? a. /b. / both

1. "There's somebody outside."

a. That'll be John.

b. That's going to be John.

2. [At a dinner party]

a. Will you have some more wine?

b. Are you going to have some more wine?

"Thank you."

3. My brother's got great patience.

a. He will sit for hours waiting for a fish to bite.

b. He's going to sit for hours waiting for a fish to bite.

4. "Goodbye."

a. Bye. I'll see you next week.

b. Bye. I'm going to see you next week.

5. "I'm taking my umbrella."

a. "Do you think it'll rain?"

b. "Do you think it's going to rain?"

6. "I've got a splitting headache."

a. If you lie down for a while you'll feel much better.

b. If you lie down for a while you're going to feel much better.

7. "Jane's putting on weight"

a. She will have a baby.

b. She's going to have a baby.

8. [stuck in traffic, a long way from the destination]

"The meeting starts in 10 minutes".

a. We'll be late.

b. We're going to be late.

9. "You wanted to see me?"

a. Yes, it won't take long.

b. Yes, it isn't going to take long.

10. "You were a disgrace last night."

a. I promise I won't do it again.

b. I promise I'm not going to do it again.

[the swagman]

1- a 2 - a 3- 4 -a 5- b 6- a 7 -b 8 -a or b 9 a 10 - a

[PeaceBlondie]

This might be fun. My answers are in bold.

So how does everyone feel about these? a. /b. / both

1. "There's somebody outside."

a. That'll be John.

b. That's going to be John.

c. That would be John. (or)

d. It's John. Either way, it's present, not future. He's outside now.

2. [At a dinner party]

a. Will you have some more wine?

b. Are you going to have some more wine?

"Thank you."

c. Would you like some more wine? (formal setting, fancy construction)

3. My brother's got great patience.

a. He will sit for hours waiting for a fish to bite.

b. He's going to sit for hours waiting for a fish to bite.

Answer a, or "He sits for hours..."

4. "Goodbye."

a. Bye. I'll see you next week.

b. Bye. I'm going to see you next week.

a

5. "I'm taking my umbrella."

a. "Do you think it'll rain?"

b. "Do you think it's going to rain?"

a, but b is okay, too.

6. "I've got a splitting headache."

a. If you lie down for a while you'll feel much better.

b. If you lie down for a while you're going to feel much better.

a

7. "Jane's putting on weight"

a. She will have a baby.

b. She's going to have a baby.

b - I don't think Americans would even say, "She'll have a baby."

8. [stuck in traffic, a long way from the destination]

"The meeting starts in 10 minutes".

a. We'll be late.

b. We're going to be late.

Either; they're essentially identical in meaning (to me).

9. "You wanted to see me?"

a. Yes, it won't take long.

b. Yes, it isn't going to take long.

a, because I'm trying to prove it won't take long.

10. "You were a disgrace last night."

a. I promise I won't do it again.

b. I promise I'm not going to do it again.

a

I'm not sure if my answers show a trend or general preference, but it's my style to....well, it's just my style. None of the above options would mis-communicate. Therefore, to my warped mind, all the answers are correct.

[stevejones123]

The rule for the apostrophe is that it substitutes for a missing letter or letters.

In the case of the possessive 's it subsitutes for the 'e' in the OE genitive 'es'. Now the fact that modern English plurals are formed by adding an 's' instead of changing the root (woman/women) or adding 'en' (child/children) as used to be the case has confused things, as the 's' is now serving two purposes.

Accordingly if the noun is singular you add the genitive ending 'the girl's house' but if it is plural in spoken speech you don't 'the girls' house' referring to a house in multiownership. Here you have an apostrophe at the end of the word because it substutes for two missing letters, the 'es' of the genitive that is no longer said.

Just to confuse this there is a tendency to add the possessive 's' where a singular noun ends in 's', for example 'James's book' (And, confusion comounded, we talk about 'Henry James's novels', but the 'King James' Bible'.

For the difference between 'will' and 'going to' you would do best to consult one of the advanced learners/not very advanced teacher's grammars such as Swan or Murphy.

As far as differences in certainty between 'will' and 'going to' are concerned there are two or three scenario to concern us.

First of all there is the use of 'will' for a spontaneous decision.

You ask your friend where he is going this Christmas, and he looks puzzled, then the light bulb goes off, and he says "I know, I'll go to Sri Lanka." A week later you ask him and he says "Yes, I'm going to go to Sri Lanka." A week after that he has bought the ticket and now uses the Present Continuous to intimate the matter is 100% certain "I'm going to Sri Lanka." So here 'going to' is more definite than 'will' but less so than the present continous.

Next we have the use of 'will' for a promise. If your significant other says "I'll be back from the pub at ten" he's making a promise. If he says, 'I'm going to be back from the pub at ten" he is referring to his intentions, or that he has evidence that something will happen to cause his early return. Which is the more definite in this case depends on how much you trust his promises.

Then we have 'will' for predictions. If you say 'it'll rain tonight" you are making a prediction, possibly based on past trends. On the other hand if you say "it's going to rain tonight" then you are making that prediction on the basis of current evidence, such as the gathering clouds in the sky. This existence of current evidence for the prediction explains why Spanish grammarians call the construction the "fiuturo immediato", which is certainly a misnomer as far as the English construction occurs.

With regard to 'did you eat' and 'have you eaten', there is a definite distinction between British and American English, the Americans tending to use the past simple form 'did you eat' where the British would use the Present Perfect (some years back a colleague of mine did his field work for his MA in Applied Linguistics by spending some weeks standing at the BA counter at Terminal 1 at Heathrow and counting the use of Past Simple and Present Perfect amongst the transatlantic travellers that checked in and then classifying the info according to their country of origin -- when I asked him what conclusion he had drawn from his research he replied "The Present Perfect should be banned!").

With regard to British English usage the point is that the Present Perfect ('have you eaten') is a present tense. It either refers to a time scheme that includes the present ('have you eaten today?') or presumes the matter in question has some relevance to the present ('Have you eaten? There's some left-over lasagne in the fridge I can microwave for you.'). The Past Simple on the other hand is precisely that, past, and either refers to a time scheme that is not part of the present ('I had a snack an hour ago.') or does not have any importance in the present.

So, to amplify that last point, if you hear "Did you eat?" in an American accent you can still hold out some hope of being offered sustenance, but if it's uttered in a British accent you'd better tighten your belt.

Edited November 30, 2006 by stevejones123

[bkkandrew]

I find that the definitive useage of punctuation can be found in Lyn Truss' book; Eats, Shoots and leaves...

It is also a great read...

[the swagman]

definitive.

I hope you are a little less wordy with your students.

[gpt]

The rule for the apostrophe is that it substitutes for a missing letter or letters.

In the case of the possessive 's it subsitutes for the 'e' in the OE genitive 'es'. Now the fact that modern English plurals are formed by adding an 's' instead of changing the root (woman/women) or adding 'en' (child/children) as used to be the case has confused things, as the 's' is now serving two purposes.

Accordingly if the noun is singular you add the genitive ending 'the girl's house' but if it is plural in spoken speech you don't 'the girls' house' referring to a house in multiownership. Here you have an apostrophe at the end of the word because it substutes for two missing letters, the 'es' of the genitive that is no longer said.

Just to confuse this there is a tendency to add the possessive 's' where a singular noun ends in 's', for example 'James's book' (And, confusion comounded, we talk about 'Henry James's novels', but the 'King James' Bible'.

For the difference between 'will' and 'going to' you would do best to consult one of the advanced learners/not very advanced teacher's grammars such as Swan or Murphy.

As far as differences in certainty between 'will' and 'going to' are concerned there are two or three scenario to concern us.

First of all there is the use of 'will' for a spontaneous decision.

You ask your friend where he is going this Christmas, and he looks puzzled, then the light bulb goes off, and he says "I know, I'll go to Sri Lanka." A week later you ask him and he says "Yes, I'm going to go to Sri Lanka." A week after that he has bought the ticket and now uses the Present Continuous to intimate the matter is 100% certain "I'm going to Sri Lanka." So here 'going to' is more definite than 'will' but less so than the present continous.

Next we have the use of 'will' for a promise. If your significant other says "I'll be back from the pub at ten" he's making a promise. If he says, 'I'm going to be back from the pub at ten" he is referring to his intentions, or that he has evidence that something will happen to cause his early return. Which is the more definite in this case depends on how much you trust his promises.

Then we have 'will' for predictions. If you say 'it'll rain tonight" you are making a prediction, possibly based on past trends. On the other hand if you say "it's going to rain tonight" then you are making that prediction on the basis of current evidence, such as the gathering clouds in the sky. This existence of current evidence for the prediction explains why Spanish grammarians call the construction the "fiuturo immediato", which is certainly a misnomer as far as the English construction occurs.

With regard to 'did you eat' and 'have you eaten', there is a definite distinction between British and American English, the Americans tending to use the past simple form 'did you eat' where the British would use the Present Perfect (some years back a colleague of mine did his field work for his MA in Applied Linguistics by spending some weeks standing at the BA counter at Terminal 1 at Heathrow and counting the use of Past Simple and Present Perfect amongst the transatlantic travellers that checked in and then classifying the info according to their country of origin -- when I asked him what conclusion he had drawn from his research he replied "The Present Perfect should be banned!").

With regard to British English usage the point is that the Present Perfect ('have you eaten') is a present tense. It either refers to a time scheme that includes the present ('have you eaten today?') or presumes the matter in question has some relevance to the present ('Have you eaten? There's some left-over lasagne in the fridge I can microwave for you.'). The Past Simple on the other hand is precisely that, past, and either refers to a time scheme that is not part of the present ('I had a snack an hour ago.') or does not have any importance in the present.

So, to amplify that last point, if you hear "Did you eat?" in an American accent you can still hold out some hope of being offered sustenance, but if it's uttered in a British accent you'd better tighten your belt.

It is the King James Bible (no apostrophe) and you have just demonstrated the "greengrocer's apostrophe". You have used hypercorrection. The full name is "The King James Version of the Bible" - note no apostrophe, over the years the 'version of the' has been dropped and we are left with The King James Bible. Now what about the possessive form of James, is it James' or James's? Exeter City play at St James Park, Newcastle play at St James' Park and there is a St James's Park in London. The first version is named after St James and therefore is not possessive, we do not say 'Lumpini's Park do we? For whatever reason those who named the other two parks decided to use the possessive. I think the main difference is how it is said in the local dialect, I would always use James's in preference to James'

You are tying yourself up in knots with 'Have you eaten?' and 'Did you eat?' My reply if someone asked me "Did you eat?" would be "Did I eat what?", it would be better to use a full sentence - "Did you eat the last biscuit?" Again the same with the fragmented 'Have you eaten', add 'lunch yet?' There is hardly any difference between them, again it is a matter of dialect. Now, excuse me, I have to empty my bladder, so will I be 'having a pee' or doing a pee'? I have heard both terms and both are correct - just a matter of dialect!

Edited November 30, 2006 by gpt

[PeaceBlondie]

eat can be transitive (taking an object, such as "He has eaten breakfast") or intransitive (without an object, such as "Don't talk when you're eating").

Besides, teaching English in Thailand, it's best to avoid YET.

[Sulaphat]

Jeet jet?

[gpt]

Jeet jet?

About 30 minutes ago, have you?

[OneeyedJohn]

When playing school rugby , I always loved the teams of POSSIBLES versus the PROBABLES...

I knew which side I preferred

[Doza]

Why do some people (think its an American thing) say "could care less" instead of "couldn't care less"???

The idea it so imply your care factor is so low, it can't go any lower so saying "could" doesn't make sense because you are actually saying your care factor is not at its lowest and you could, if you wanted to, care less, but in fact you don't. So you are actually caring!

Whereas "couldn't" means you don't care so much you have reached the end of your care factor and you can't go any lower and is in fact the correct usage I believe.

Eg.

"I couldn't care less if my girlfriend leaves because I hate her". Your cae factor is at rock bottom already and can't go any lower here.

"I could care less if my girlfriend leaves because I hate her". YOu in fact care to some degree because you say you could actually care less than you are right now so your care factor is not at its lowest here.

Make sense people...? Can we have some agreement and stick to the correct usage please?