3,509 reputation
917
bio website
location Seattle, WA
age 29
visits member for 2 years, 5 months
seen Apr 16 at 18:01

Apr
8
answered Is a comma necessary before “for which”?
Apr
7
comment What special implication does ‘totally’ have in “He’s totally going to call you”?
@YoichiOishi: See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony#Verbal_irony. The idea is that, by overly emphasizing the truth of a statement, we can imply that it's actually not true.
Apr
7
answered What special implication does ‘totally’ have in “He’s totally going to call you”?
Apr
5
comment What do you call those high areas that give you a full view of the city?
@RyeɃreḁd: Which dialect is "AE"? If "American English", then -- I disagree. I've always understood "vista" to be the beautiful view itself, not the place from which to view it.
Mar
29
comment What is the name for “pronunciation spelling”?
@Kris: Sorry, it's just too explicit; I can't clarify it any further. (Maybe you missed or misread a word somewhere?) The question explicitly says that it's talking about dictionaries, and the article explicitly says that "phonemic" systems are what are found in dictionaries.
Mar
29
comment What is the name for “pronunciation spelling”?
I'm not the downvoter, but -- you seem to have selected the wrong passage from that article. The OP is asking about what the article calls "'phonemic' systems", not what it calls "'non-phonemic' or 'newspaper' systems".
Mar
28
answered Difference between “focus” and “focus on” in “My main focus is Spanish.”
Mar
23
comment Which verbs apart from the pure copula follow the existential 'there'?
@LeonConrad: There never replaces a noun or noun phrase. Insofar as it's a pronoun (which admittedly is debatable), it's a dummy pronoun. (Compare "it" in "It's hard to disagree.") And "there's been an accident" is not using there with has, it's using there with be. ("Has been" is a form of be.) By the way, Wiktionary is not Wikipedia: the two projects are related, but distinct.
Mar
23
comment Which verbs apart from the pure copula follow the existential 'there'?
@LeonConrad: It's not "perfective aspect" in this case -- English doesn't have perfective and imperfective aspects -- it's that the verbs themselves are perfective. (Another term is eventive verb.) I don't understand why you feel that verbs denoting emergence or appearance would not be perfective. Re: "the existential 'there' can't be used with the progressive or imperfect tense": English doesn't have an imperfect tense. It does have a progressive aspect, and I agree that something like "there's having to be" is awkward (though not impossible).
Mar
23
comment Which verbs apart from the pure copula follow the existential 'there'?
By the way, you might be interested in the definitions and examples at en.wiktionary.org/wiki/there#Pronoun. (Full disclosure: I wrote them, several years ago.) The (not very detailed) breakdown there, which I still agree with, takes a different approach than yours, which is why I can't answer your question about "other types of verbs": your taxonomy is such that it's incomplete, but I don't see how to complete it compatibly.
Mar
23
comment Which verbs apart from the pure copula follow the existential 'there'?
Also, for your second list, it's not true that these are only found in the past; we can also say "if there should arise [...]", "soon there will emerge [...]", and so on. (These are well-attested.) I think what you're sensing is that these verbs are perfective in sense. Perfective verbs are less common in the present tense, because they can't describe ongoing states; but they can appear in the present, e.g. when describing a repeated event: "every day, there appears [...]".
Mar
23
comment Which verbs apart from the pure copula follow the existential 'there'?
Your first list is not actually about other verbs that can follow there: in each of those cases, there still goes with be, it's just that a raising verb has stepped in to obscure this.
Mar
16
comment If and would construction
What sort of answer are you looking for? I mean, you've already given the descriptivist answer ("I've seen it so often") and the prescriptivist answer ("it's wrong according to grammar guides"); what else is there?
Mar
14
answered Difference between “my” an “my own”
Mar
14
comment 1 in 7 appleS becomeS green? or, 1 in 7 apple becomeS green? or, 1 in 7 appleS become green?
@FumbleFingers: "Family ... their" is not an example of singular they. (And "has ... their" is no more "potentially awkward" in U.S. English than "Microsoft have" is in U.K. English. I'm really shocked at how provincial your attitudes about this are.)
Mar
14
comment “1 in 10 are” or “1 in 10 is”?
-1, sorry. There are apparently dialects where both are acceptable, but it's foolish to suggest that speakers of other dialects must be "prescriptivists [...] inventing a problem."
Mar
14
comment 1 in 7 appleS becomeS green? or, 1 in 7 apple becomeS green? or, 1 in 7 appleS become green?
@FumbleFingers: Your the family is united example intrigues me. In U.S. English, we'd often say (for example) The family is united in their determination (though its is also acceptable, and perhaps preferable). In U.K. English, does that sound contradictory to you? Are you forced to choose between are united in their and is united in its?
Mar
13
comment 1 in 7 appleS becomeS green? or, 1 in 7 apple becomeS green? or, 1 in 7 appleS become green?
As long as there are more than seven apples in the world, there will always -- necessarily -- be a set of seven apples such that the number that will turn green is either zero or greater than one. So this isn't much of an assumption.
Mar
13
comment 1 in 7 appleS becomeS green? or, 1 in 7 apple becomeS green? or, 1 in 7 appleS become green?
@FumbleFingers: That's absurd, but O.K. At least your absurdity is less annoying than the more usual prescriptivist one, where people insist that everyone else's usage is "loose".
Mar
13
comment 1 in 7 appleS becomeS green? or, 1 in 7 apple becomeS green? or, 1 in 7 appleS become green?
I don't think an appeal to semantics helps here, since what "one in seven apples becomes green" really really means is "one-seventh of apples become green". I mean, no one is promising that if you take exactly seven apples, exactly one will become green.