 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2010to sell or to be sold
A sentence reads: The property sold on July 11, and closed on September 19. I think the above sentence should be: The property was sold on July 11, and was closed on Sept. 19. In particular, the first part, 'the property sold' is incorrect. The word 'was' cannot be omitted. Please teach. Thanks. A non-native speaker of English > A sentence reads: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > A non-native speaker of English I agree tht the "was" is required for the "sold" part. As for the "closed" part, it was not the property that closed -- it was the escrow (account) that "was closed".  SignatureSkitt (AmE) Fulio Pen: >> The property sold on July 11, and closed on September 19. >> >> I think the above sentence should be: >> >> The property was sold on July 11, and was closed on Sept. 19. "Skitt": > I agree tht the "was" is required for the "sold" part. No, both versions are correct. Consider: "The store had a big display of tomatoes, which were selling briskly." This use of "sell" is perhaps more common among people who sell things for a living, but others use it as well. > As for the "closed" part, it was not the property that closed -- > it was the escrow (account) that "was closed". This may vary by region. Here we'd say it was the *sale* that was closed. That is, the sale was "made" on July 11 when the buyer and seller agreed on a price, and "closed" on September 19 when the seller actually received the payment and turned over the keys. However, it's also common enough to used "closed" in this sense with the buyer, the seller, or the property as the subject. But not as the object. So the original is correct and, in this case, Fulio's version with "was closed" is wrong. By the way, for trades in the stock market, "settled" is used with a similar meaning to this real estate usage of "closed". If I phone in an order to buy 1,000 shares of CNR, I have three business days (I think) to make sure my account contains the necessary amount of money; after that time, the trade will be settled by transferring the money to the seller (minus the broker's commission) and the shares to me. SignatureMark Brader First, the next time you buy a house, get one that msb@vex.net costs exactly $100,000. It makes the math easier. Toronto -- John Gilmer My text in this article is in the public domain. > Fulio Pen: >>> The property sold on July 11, and closed on September 19. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > "sell" is perhaps more common among people who sell things for a > living, but others use it as well. I agree. More generally, many transitive verbs can be used, especially in an informal contexr, as intransitive verbs with their normal objects as subject. "I like driving this car" -> "this car drives well" Signatureathel On Jan 16, 1:40 am, Athel Cornish-Bowden <acorn...@ibsm.cnrs-mrs.fr> wrote: > > Fulio Pen: > >>> The property sold on July 11, and closed on September 19. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > -- > athel Thank you all for the discussion. I've learned a lot from you. fulio pen >> Fulio Pen: >>>> The property sold on July 11, and closed on September 19. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > "I like driving this car" -> "this car drives well" An example from advertising, unlikely to occur in ordinary speech: "The soup that eats like a meal". SignatureRoland Hutchinson He calls himself "the Garden State's leading violist da gamba," ... comparable to being ruler of an exceptionally small duchy. --Newark (NJ) Star Ledger ( http://tinyurl.com/RolandIsNJ ) >>> Fulio Pen: >>>>> The property sold on July 11, and closed on September 19. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > An example from advertising, unlikely to occur in ordinary speech: > "The soup that eats like a meal". A butcher in Tiverton, years ago, said of a couple of chickens we were buying, "They'll eat lovely." One I've heard a couple of times is "notice", meaning "be noticed": "Put a vase of flowers on the stain, and it won't notice." There are lots of them, and I think many are perfectly standard. SignatureMike. > A butcher in Tiverton, years ago, said of a couple of chickens we were > buying, "They'll eat lovely." One I've heard a couple of times is > "notice", meaning "be noticed": "Put a vase of flowers on the stain, and > it won't notice." There are lots of them, and I think many are perfectly > standard. Lots in sport. The pitch/green is playing very fast today. Regards Jonathan > Fulio Pen: >>> The property sold on July 11, and closed on September 19. >>> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > "sell" is perhaps more common among people who sell things for a > living, but others use it as well. Yes, I am aware of the usage, but I usually prefer the transitive form. I concur with your correction. >> As for the "closed" part, it was not the property that closed -- >> it was the escrow (account) that "was closed". [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > the money to the seller (minus the broker's commission) and the > shares to me. I was too selective in my advice about what is closed. I was describing the legal language applicable to California real estate transactions. The only thing closed here with regard to real estate transactions is the escrow. What might be said elsewhere, in law or otherwise, is anybody's guess. SignatureSkitt (in SF Bay Area) http://home.comcast.net/~skitt99/main.html >> Fulio Pen: > [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > transactions is the escrow. What might be said elsewhere, in law or > otherwise, is anybody's guess. I should add that there could very well be confusion about when the term "sold" applies. A real estate sale is not completed with the making of an offer and its acceptance. That is merely the potential starting point. There are many things to be taken care of, the last thing being the close of escrow, at which time the sale is final. Only the recording of the deed remains to be done. Again, what is said by lay people in various places varies and may not be totally appropriate in a legal sense, but then, who cares? SignatureSkitt (AmE) >I should add that there could very well be confusion about when the term >"sold" applies. A real estate sale is not completed with the making of an >offer and its acceptance. That is merely the potential starting point. >There are many things to be taken care of, the last thing being the close of >escrow, at which time the sale is final. Only the recording of the deed >remains to be done. In the UK, you'll regularly see "For Sale " and "Sold" signs bearing the Estate Agent's name outside properties. The latter invariably also have "Subject to Contract" on them (in much smaller letters) to prevent them being false advertising - a sale may have been agreed, but it's not complete until the contracts have been exchanged (at which point one of the first acts of the new owner will almost certainly be to remove the sign). I've also, recently, seen one locally which merely had "STC" - which I suspect is sailing perilously close to the wind of illegality. Cheers - Ian (BrE: Yorks., Hants.) >> I should add that there could very well be confusion about when the >> term "sold" applies. A real estate sale is not completed with the [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > I've also, recently, seen one locally which merely had "STC" - which I > suspect is sailing perilously close to the wind of illegality. Here, the signs say "Sale Pending". SignatureSkitt (AmE) Ian Noble: >> In the UK, you'll regularly see "For Sale " and "Sold" signs bearing >> the Estate Agent's name outside properties. The latter invariably also >> have "Subject to Contract" on them (in much smaller letters) ... "Skitt": > Here, the signs say "Sale Pending". Just "Sold" here, normally remaining posted until the sale closes. When we bought our house, the sale was conditional on a house inspection and a couple of other things, and the sign continued to read "For Sale" during that period. I don't know if a real estate agent would have done that; this was a private sale, i.e. we dealt directly with the owner. He apparently assumed that the inspection would turn up some minor problems, which we would use to negotiate a lower price. It did and we did, but we would have preferred he fix the problems and sell at the original price. SignatureMark Brader | "Must undefined behavior obey *all* the laws of physics, msb@vex.net | or is the restriction limited to time travel?" Toronto | --Heather Downs My text in this article is in the public domain. >Ian Noble: >>> In the UK, you'll regularly see "For Sale " and "Sold" signs bearing [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >we did, but we would have preferred he fix the problems and sell at the >original price. To the best of my knowledge, there's no law or other rule that says (in Florida) that "Sale Pending" must be added to the sign. It seems go both ways in this area. Some homeowners want to remove the sign as soon as possible, and some real estate agents want the sign left up (as advertising)as long as possible. Personally, I removed the sign as soon as the offer/acceptance was complete. I got tired of mowing and trimming around it. The sale could have fallen through because it was contingent on financing, but I wasn't worried about it. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida >>I should add that there could very well be confusion about when the term >>"sold" applies. A real estate sale is not completed with the making of an [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >which point one of the first acts of the new owner will almost >certainly be to remove the sign). There's a "For Sale" sign down the street from me with a "Sale Pending" sign hanging under it. I would imagine the real estate agent requests that the sign remain up until the new owners take over because the sign is advertising for both the firm and the agent. SignatureTony Cooper - Orlando, Florida >>> I should add that there could very well be confusion about when the >>> term "sold" applies. A real estate sale is not completed with the [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > requests that the sign remain up until the new owners take over > because the sign is advertising for both the firm and the agent. Not only that -- the sale might not be concluded, and any other prospective buyer could still make an inquiry about that. The loan might not come ... SignatureSkitt (AmE) >In the UK, you'll regularly see "For Sale " and "Sold" signs bearing >the Estate Agent's name outside properties. The latter invariably also [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >I've also, recently, seen one locally which merely had "STC" - which I >suspect is sailing perilously close to the wind of illegality. Around here, "STC" is so common as to seem perfectly normal, and certainly well-understood. SignatureKaty Jennison spamtrap: remove the first two letters after the @ Ian Noble wrote, in <6om6l5ts7ajloi8rgt9i6kucmpam8l6og0@4ax.com> on Sun, 17 Jan 2010 18:53:09 +0000: > >I should add that there could very well be confusion about when the term > >"sold" applies. A real estate sale is not completed with the making of an [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > I've also, recently, seen one locally which merely had "STC" - which I > suspect is sailing perilously close to the wind of illegality. Here in Ireland they say Sale Agreed instead of Sold to signify the same thing. SignatureNick Spalding BrE/IrE > In the UK, you'll regularly see "For Sale " and "Sold" signs bearing > the Estate Agent's name outside properties. The latter invariably also [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > which point one of the first acts of the new owner will almost > certainly be to remove the sign). "SOLD" signs used to be common around here but seem to have been replaced by "UNDER CONTRACT" signs. That may be to solicit back-up offers in case the original sale falls through. SignatureJohn Varela Trade NEWlamps for OLDlamps for email > Again, what is said by lay people in various places varies and may not be > totally appropriate in a legal sense, but then, who cares? The answer to that rhetorical question is - speaking as a lawyer - usually "the lawyers". We have to live, you know. Regards Jonathan In our last episode, <1623a754-b511-485b-8511-c14a89ac3503@22g2000yqr.googlegroups.com>, the lovely and talented Fulio Pen broadcast on alt.usage.english: > A sentence reads: > The property sold on July 11, and closed on September 19. > I think the above sentence should be: > The property was sold on July 11, and was closed on Sept. 19. In > particular, the first part, 'the property sold' is incorrect. The word > 'was' cannot be omitted. Please teach. Thanks. For some verbs, including 'sell,' the object of the verb in a transitive sense can become the subject of the verb in an intransitive sense: I will sell the bicycle for $300. -> The bicycle will sell for $300. The Bike Rack sells this model for $425. -> This model sells for $425 (at the Bike Rack). Sears sold me this bike for $375. -> This bike sold for $375 (at Sears). Putting the verb in the transitive sense in the passive voice is also correct. So: Sears sold me this bike for $375. -> This bike was sold for $375 (by Sears). Thus, 'The property sold on July 11,' is correct and so is 'The property was sold on July 11.' The problem with 'closed' is that neither the property nor the seller closed anything. What was closed was the transaction. I suspect, however, that both 'closed' and 'was closed' are commonly used as in this example in the real estate trade. SignatureLars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> Warbama's Afghaninam day: 45 1081.0 hours since Warbama declared Viet Nam II. Warbama: An LBJ for the Twenty-First century. No hope. No change. |
Reply to this Message |
 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.