Job Discussion Forums

MonkeyKing · Joined: 24 May 2003 Posts: 96 Location: Beijing

Hi there.

Somebody please give me a clear and simple explanation as to why this sentence is wrong:

"The number of grocery stores closed remained constantly between 1955 and 1995."

I know what it should say ("The number of grocery stores closing remained constant between 1955 and 1995."), but I need to explain why it's wrong.

For example, it's ok to say something 'increased rapidly', but not that something 'remained constantly'. What's the rule here?

Thanks.

MK

basiltherat · Joined: 04 Oct 2003 Posts: 952

sounds like you are training ielts folks.
Adverbs of behaviour generally take ____ly at the end of the adjective form. The verb it is describing should be a verb of action (e.g. as in your example increase). Remain , by definition, indicates no movement/action. As a result, it would not be able to be used with the adverbial form. That's how I would explain it simply.
basil

once again · Joined: 27 Jan 2003 Posts: 815

Whereas the sentence:

"The lion lost all the fur on his neck and went to the lion wig makers and they said it would take two hours for completion. He was ok with this. In fact, he re-maned there happily for the whole time"

....would suggest a very different answer.

basiltherat · Joined: 04 Oct 2003 Posts: 952

Mmmmm. I see the problem.
Once Again, what do you suggest the very different answer might be ? I'm stumped !
Regards
basil

guest of Japan · Joined: 28 Feb 2003 Posts: 1601 Location: Japan

The number remained: constant, fixed, unchanged, ever-changing, static, proportionate, etc.

All of these are objects which relate to the number.

The number changed: rapidly, proportionately, logarithmically, often, constantly, etc.

These are all adverbs which modify the verb.

If something remains constantly, it never moves from its place.
If something remains constant, then it never changes its nature or definition.

My boss remains constantly near me.
My boss remains constant in his stupidity.

Thanks for the joke, once again.

carnac · Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2004 2:14 pm Post subject:

You are describing an aspect of "the number", a noun, rather than something the number did, a verb. In this case, the number is doing nothing.
The number remained constant.
The sky remained clear.
The people remained silent.
As such, you are modifying the noun, not the verb, calling for an adjective, not an adverb.
It can be more easily seen if the verb "remain" is changed to the verb "be".
The number is constant.
The sky is clear.
The people are silent.
Putting and adverb into the sentence
"The number of grocery stores closed remained constant between 1955 and 1995."
You might say:
The number of grocery stores obviously remained constant between.."
where "obviously" describes how [verb] the stores remained, and "constant" talks about the unchanging [noun] number.
Going back to my first sentence in this post where the number isn't doing something but is being described, let's change the verb so that the number is in fact active:
"The number is constantly increasing."
Now the adverb is modifying a verb which is being used as a gerund (verb used as noun).
Isn't this stuff fun?

Peaches En Regalia · Posted: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:31 am Post subject:

kait · Joined: 17 Jun 2004 Posts: 93 Location: Lungtan, Taiwan

Wow, where did you learn this stuff? I remain standing constantly in amazement at your grammar knowledge. Very Happy

basiltherat · Joined: 04 Oct 2003 Posts: 952

interesting reply Peaches. Couldnt you think of a more diplomatic way to say I was mistaken ? All the best for the future. Enjoy life, if u can get that chip off your shoulder. Bye and regards
Basil Wink

Peaches En Regalia · Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2004 3:38 am Post subject:

That was "diplomatic", idiot. If one of my undergraduate students produced that garbage as a putative teleological "explanation" to the point raised I would have been harsh. However, I understand that you have never achieved undergraduate status so it is not really your fault. That is why I toned down my response. After all, one thing all immature, uneducated kids have in common is that they do not respond well to criticism.

timmo · Joined: 31 Mar 2004 Posts: 660

Personally I would choose to recast the entire sentence. To the eye and ear it is an ugly composition in the first place.

I think the use of "closed" is too ambiguous as it stands. Does it refer to a set number of grocery stores, no higher than 1995 that were closed and remained closed or an ongoing action of closing between 1955 and 1995 grocery stores for an unspecified length of time?

Would we need to know the context in order to better recast the idea?

timmo · Joined: 31 Mar 2004 Posts: 660

Duh, I have just read the first post again. You are not talking about numbers are you... you are talking dates? Jeez! Well sorry. Embarassed

jpvanderwerf2001 · Joined: 02 Oct 2003 Posts: 1117 Location: New York

Li-ka · Joined: 21 Mar 2004 Posts: 52

Can I pose another grammar question?

A student has been told that the following sentence is grammatically incorrect (by a non-native English teacher, which leaves me suspicious):

Don't go to bed without brushing your teeth.

For me, it sounds well enough... I cannot find anything wrong. I was told that 'without' is the word that is incorrectly used in this sentence, but I need to be able to explain why and I can't. I can't explain why it would be right either.

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

once again · Joined: 27 Jan 2003 Posts: 815

Peaches wrote: