Korean Job Discussion Forums

[raewon]

Sorry for what might seem a stupid question, but is there any way the following sentence could be considered grammatically correct?

Obesity may indeed be a social problem, but shedding pounds and practicing healthy dietary habits is definitely a personal struggle that is not limited to Americans.

Or does it have to be

Obesity may indeed be a social problem, but shedding pounds and practicing healthy dietary habits are definitely personal struggles that are not limited to Americans.

Thanks a lot.

[moosehead]

you don't need the comma before "but"

[moosehead]

I say #2 because:

Shedding pounds and practicing healthy dietary habits are definitely personal struggles that are not limited to Americans.


works so well. sometimes just re-looking at the sentence helps.

previously someone posted about how if it's a compound situation (here you have a compound subject) and they can both go it alone, you can base the verb agreement on that, which is fine. In this particular situation, the context is that you were discussing mulitple items that define the "personal struggles." Therefore I say use the plural verb "are."

[lifeinkorea]

I would keep the comma, and the "is" is meant to convey a "collective" atmosphere. For example, "It is fun to lay on the beach and swim".

In this case, the word order is swapped. I would make that change before worrying about the is/are issue.

It is definitely a personal struggle for Americans to shed pounds and practice healthy dietary habits.

[themagicbean]

"are" is correct.

The subject of the clause in question is two things: X (shedding pounds) and Y (practicing healthy dietary habits). X and Y are ... (plural subject = are for s/v agreement).

You don't need the comma before "but," but you can keep it out of style if you want to emphasize the pause and the contrast between the clauses.

[moosehead]

fyi, putting a comma before "but" has considered incorrect since, well, around 1981.

c'mon folks - get with it already.

[isisaredead]

[lifeinkorea]

[The Cosmic Hum]

[ontheway]

Either "is" or "are" can be correct. It depends on the context and intended meaning.

If "shedding pounds and practicing healthy dietary habits" is considered as a single activity involving two elements then "is" is appropriate.

If "shedding pounds" and "practicing healthy dietary habits" are considered as two independent activities, then "are" would be the correct choice.


As for commas, usage is often a matter of style and people do not agree, whether you're Perdue U. or Frank or just lost, it is up to you.

[moosehead]

ok, well, I was taught technical journalsim by a former editor of the Chicago Sun. His stance was it was overused and didn't belong before "but" since the word "but" denotes a pause anyway, that the comma was redundant. I agree and have since stopped using it before "but." Around this same time is when it was also agreed that one could start sentences with "but" or for that matter, "and."

I've since been published internationally, edited scientific peer-review papers and taught a considerable number of writing classes. While this seldom comes up, it does pop up from time to time.

It may very well be a matter of style BUT the point is, is it really necessary to have both the comma and the word "but" in the sentence?

punctuation rules do evolve, sometimes slowly so I'm a bit surprised to see this coming up again as I do recall it being discussed back in the early 1990's.

[MattAwesome]

they both look good. forget the fools telling you to have a comma before but. thats not what he is asking

they are both correct because when you differentiated is and are, you also changed struggle and struggles.
singular collective = is
plural anything = are

[themagicbean]

Journalistic style is often very different from other styles. For example AP guidelines state one space after a period instead of two, whereas it's two everywhere else. Generally journalistic guidelines are most concerned with space (hence replacing conjunctions with commas in headlines), so the poster who needed to put up her resume to convince us to listen has fair ground for stating the comma is unnecessary. But it does add emphasis to the separation of the clauses. It's a stylistic thing in most contexts. Necessary? No. Inherently incorrect? Also no.

[The Cosmic Hum]