Hot answers tagged pronouns
This construction isn't anything new. It's just that once you notice a pattern, you keep noticing it. This pattern is called Left-Dislocation. It consists in copying a full noun phrase (normally the subject) to the beginning of the sentence, while leaving a resumptive pronoun in the original place. There is also Right-Dislocation, which moves the NP to the ...
This is what the Chicago Manual of Style has to say: 5.14 Noun gender English nouns have no true gender as that property is understood in many other languages. For example, whether a noun refers to a masculine or feminine person or thing does not determine the form of the article as it does in French, German, Spanish, and other languages. Still, some ...
From The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (CGEL), ch. 5, § 1, p. 327: Traditionally pronouns are regarded as a separate part of speech, but there are strong grounds for treating them as a subcategory of noun. They differ inflectionally from prototypical nouns and permit a narrower range of dependents, but they qualify as nouns by virtue of ...
My answer complements this and a previous discussion of the issue Pronouns: a word class or a subclass of nouns? by quoting extensively from Aarts' analysis in Modern English Grammar on pages 44-46 under the heading Pronouns (Oxford University Press, 2011). Pronouns belong to the class of nouns because they can head noun phrases that function as ...
It's a stylistic pecadillo at best. One shouldn't mix points of view in the same piece of writing. It's syntactically awkward to use one and you interchangeably, since it may cause the reader momentary confusion and create an undesireable ambiguity. As a matter of formality, old-school stylists like Warriner say that using "you" in a general sense - in ...
I think it's acceptable. One and you are not referring to the same hypothetical person, so they don't need to agree with each other. One refers to the person who is coming to the conclusion based on looking at the house, while you refers to doctors. As Rob Ster points out, mixing points of view in a single sentence is awkward, so it might be better ...
Same reason phone calls have a lot of second person pronouns. Because you are talking directly to someone.
Towards a term or phrase specifying the insincere usage of the inclusive we to promote a feigned consensus, and by the nose thus lead groups astray... Pseudo-Formal: The inclusive first person plural in absentia. Informal: The rogue's we. The Machiavellian we. We-selling. We-hawkin'. We minus one.
A bear cub could be made an "it". John and Lou could be a "they". I think the best way would be "They recognized it".
'I' is always capitalized in standard English. In Internet chat, it isn't always capitalized.
However, the question is not about formal correctness. The question is whether it's appropriate for me to justify my, ehm, linguistic relationships with "I" with my cultural identity? If you want to use lower-case "i" for cultural reasons, you should come up with a better anecdote than that bit about everyone being a special snowflake. I don't know ...
There are a few other grammatical errors in your sentences. Since "those" refers to a plural object but "question" is singular, the first bit of your sentence should either be "those were the last questions" or "that was the last question," "this was the last question," "it was the last question," etc. Whatever. There are a lot of variations to pick from ...
As your last sentence says, 1), which has door as the only noun to which it can strictly refer, would be mistaken - if English had to be fed through a compiler that checked for syntax errors. In reality, the purpose of language is to communicate ideas, so no native speaker would bat an eyelid.
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible