Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching
Learnglish.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2004



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Compound Subject-Verb Agreement

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Ryan Waltz - 15 Jan 2004 16:30 GMT
The following sentence has me perplexed. I'm not sure what the subject
is and proper use of the verb "is" or "are" should be.

Accessing public web and FTP sites are not methods of remote access.

Is "accessing" the subject or is the phrase "accessing public web and
ftp sites" a compound subject? Please advise.
John Lawler - 15 Jan 2004 17:03 GMT
>The following sentence has me perplexed. I'm not sure what the subject
>is and proper use of the verb "is" or "are" should be.

For maximal clarity, the last sentence above should be:

    I'm not sure what the subject is, or ['and' is also OK]
    what the proper use of the verb -- "is" or "are" -- should be.

>  Accessing public web and FTP sites are not methods of remote access.

>Is "accessing" the subject or is the phrase "accessing public web and
>ftp sites" a compound subject? Please advise.

The whole gerund clause, with a single gerund "accessing" and reduced
compound direct object "public web and ftp sites", is the subject.
As a clause, it's officially singular, and thus officially governs "is".

However, that official verdict flies in the face of the obvious intent
of the speaker (or writer), to the effect that the two types of sites
should be considered plural, as witness the plural "methods" following
is/are.  The fact that the speaker felt it necessary to distinguish
web from ftp and to use "methods" instead of "method" shows that they
wanted to distinguish ftp from web, though the way it was done makes
it unclear whether the "public" applies to both "web" and "ftp" or to
"web" only; the "sites" is clearly applicable to both.

The solution (as it so often is) is for the speaker to start over and decide
clearly whether

a) they want to rule out web and ftp as separate methods of remote access

   If so, then they shouldn't do such thorough conjunction reduction on
   the subject clause, and they might consider putting in all the presumed
   quantifiers and adverbs to make it clearer.  For example:

     Neither accessing public web sites nor accessing FTP sites
     are methods of remote access.
or
     Accessing public web sites and accessing FTP sites
     are not methods of remote access.

b) ... or whether they want to rule out a single method, which could be
     either web or ftp.

   If so, then the conjunction reduction is fine, though they should consider
   using "or" instead of "and", and "methods" has to become "a method".  
   For example:

     Accessing public web or FTP sites is not a method of remote access.

Abstract grammatical questions like which word is the subject and whether
the singular or plural is 'correct' are rarely of any use in considering how
best to communicate an idea.  Being sure of what you want to say before you
say it is generally the better idea.

-John Lawler  http://www.umich.edu/~jlawler  U Michigan Linguistics Dept
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
   "You can only find truth with logic if you have already found
    truth without it."   -- G.K. Chesterton
Sebastian Hew - 16 Jan 2004 00:02 GMT
> >  Accessing public web and FTP sites are not methods of remote
> > access.
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>       Neither accessing public web sites nor accessing FTP sites
>       are methods of remote access.

If we're going by 'official verdict', then this sentence is still
incorrect, since 'neither' is traditionally held to be singular.
Robert Lieblich - 16 Jan 2004 03:03 GMT
[ ... ]

> >  a) they want to rule out web and ftp as separate methods of remote
> > access
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> If we're going by 'official verdict', then this sentence is still
> incorrect, since 'neither' is traditionally held to be singular.

As probably the most persistent (if hardly the most learned)
defender of "neither ... are" in either usage group, I am pleased to
rise to Prof. Lawler's defense (a position I rarely get to assume,
because he so rarely needs it).  Traditionally "neither" is
singular, but since it tends to be used to join subjects that have
something in common, the instinct to pluralize can be almost
overwhelming.  I expect "neither ... are" to overtake "neither ...
is" in the very near future (and the same for other verbs).

Translation: If it's good enough for John Lawler, it's good enough
for me.

(Let's hope he doesn't recant.)

Signature

Bob Lieblich
Do you have to cant before you can recant

Martin Ambuhl - 15 Jan 2004 20:20 GMT
> The following sentence has me perplexed. I'm not sure what the subject
> is and proper use of the verb "is" or "are" should be.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Is "accessing" the subject or is the phrase "accessing public web and
> ftp sites" a compound subject? Please advise.

"Accessing public web and ftp sites" is the subject, and "Accessing" is its
head with "public web and ftp sites" as the object of [the verb-like
character of the noun-like use of] "Accessing".

Signature

Martin Ambuhl

Adrian Bailey - 16 Jan 2004 01:00 GMT
> The following sentence has me perplexed. I'm not sure what the subject
> is and proper use of the verb "is" or "are" should be.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Is "accessing" the subject or is the phrase "accessing public web and
> ftp sites" a compound subject? Please advise.

"Accessing public web and ftp sites is not remote access."

Adrian
John O'Flaherty - 16 Jan 2004 03:10 GMT
>> The following sentence has me perplexed. I'm not sure what the subject
>> is and proper use of the verb "is" or "are" should be.
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
>"Accessing public web and ftp sites is not remote access."

That's much better: it fixes the problem of paralleling 'accessing'
and 'methods of access'. Another way to put it -
Remote access doesn't mean accessing public websites or FTP sites.

--
john
Tony Cooper - 16 Jan 2004 03:57 GMT
>>> The following sentence has me perplexed. I'm not sure what the subject
>>> is and proper use of the verb "is" or "are" should be.
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>and 'methods of access'. Another way to put it -
>Remote access doesn't mean accessing public websites or FTP sites.

I'm having trouble with "ftp sites".  I use Brandywine's "Free FTP"
program  to upload images and html documents to my isp host site.  I
don't think of ftp (file transfer protocol) as a site.  It's a method
of moving a file from my computer to my host's site.  I'm not sure
"method" is the best word, though.
Michael Nitabach - 16 Jan 2004 13:55 GMT
> I don't think of ftp (file transfer protocol) as a site.
> It's a method of moving a file from my computer to my host's site.
>  I'm not sure "method" is the best word, though.

You already used the best word. FTP itself is a protocol for
transferring files. Using FTP is a method for transferring files.

--
Mike Nitabach
John O'Flaherty - 16 Jan 2004 16:11 GMT
>>>> The following sentence has me perplexed. I'm not sure what the subject
>>>> is and proper use of the verb "is" or "are" should be.
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>of moving a file from my computer to my host's site.  I'm not sure
>"method" is the best word, though.

You mention your isp host site- there must be many url's there, and at
least for the html ones, each appears to the user as a web site, so
'site' is liberated from any physical meaning already. I guess you
could say "ftp destinations", or "ftp url's", though.
--
john
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2012 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.