Solutions for our pop-up quiz from Monday, Nov. 9th:
According to the prompt in the email, you had to find ONE pronoun-antecedent disagreement:
WRONG sentence: "I mean, who in THEIR right mind would make such a claim if it wasn't true?"
RIGHT sentence: "I mean, who in HIS or HER right mind would make such a claim if it weren't true?"
(You only needed to spot the pronoun-antecedent disagreement; not the "was/were" mistake!)
The rule behind it: "Who" is always singular, like "anybody," "nobody," "somebody," "someone," "anyone," and "no one."
With regard to our most recent pop-up quiz, there is one person, Sylvia Chalker, who argues against the "right grammar rules." Here is a link to one page of a review article where this person gives good reasons for why one might need to rethink a "correct grammar rule."
The rule is: "WHO is always singular." After reading this critique's statement, how do you personally think about this issue? Is Sylvia Chalker right? Is she wrong? If you could change the grammar rule, would you do so, and why? Or, why not?
HOMEWORK: Post a short comment to this blog (or, if you cannot blog for some reason, email me, or bring a print-out), giving your personal opinion. Due date: Monday, Nov. 16th, at class time. This post is worth 5 points and makes up for the 5 points missed if you didn't spot the mistake in the pop-up quiz. If you did spot it, you'll get 10 points altogther!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree with Sylvia Chalker. Who could be talking about more then one person.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sylvia Chalker that who is always singular because it is talking about an individual. If who was plural it would be talking about more than one specific thing. The plural form of who would be whose, therefore who always has to be singular. I would not change the grammar rule because it only makes sense that who is singular and not plural.
ReplyDeleteSimilar to the previous posters, I think that Sylvia Chalker makes a valid point about the use of "who." I have been around many educated people that use "who" in a plural form. I think it is important that Chalker states "who" is used by native speakers in plural form. For example, when an individiual is asking, "who is coming to the party?," the answer given is going to be more than one person. Therefore, "who" is occasionally used in plural context, which supports Sylvia Chalker's argument.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sylvia Chalker's argument. To say that who is always singular is an aggressive argument. Not only is it aggressive but it is wrong! Many people use it in that way. I don't think the rule is completely wrong but it's definitely missing some key elements. I would change the rule so that who wouldn't always be used in a singular context.
ReplyDeleteI do agree that who can talk about more than one person, but some situations just seem awkward to say or read; there should be some type of rule for those areas. All in all, i do agree with the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Chalker. What makes who singular? According to the definition that Chalker put in her article "who" can be used to describe one person or multiple people. Therefore, I believe that "who" could be singular or plural depending on how it is used in the sentence. I don't think it has to always be singular.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sylvia's argument. When I hear the word who, I think of one person. I think who should always be used as singular and not plural.
ReplyDeleteIn some ways I agree with Chalker. As the definition in the article states, "who" can be used to deribe a person or several pople. However, reading the sentence, "who are coming to the party?" just does not sound right at all, it should obviously be "who is coming to the party?" So where the definition works for who to be used as a plural word it just does not work in grammar. Who is a singular word along with one, somebody, someone, and so forth.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Chalker in the fact that who could be described as more than one person, but that it can only be possible in certain situations. In some instances it simply does not sound proper to use who as plural, but in other cases there are some exceptions. I am torn between agreement and disagreement with this article.
ReplyDeleteI agree, to an extent, with Chalker; however, using "who" in plural form in a sentence doesn't make sense to me. It is not possible to say, "who are coming with me?" It simply doesn't work; howevr, it could work in some situations. What those situations are are unclear to me.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sylvia Chalker's argument. To say that who is always singular is an aggressive argument.I would change the rule so that who wouldn't always be used in a singular context. Many people use it in that way. Some instances it does not sound proper to use who as plural, but in other cases there are some exceptions. I would not change the grammar rule because it only makes sense that who is singular and not plural.
ReplyDelete