|
Dave's ESL Cafe's Student Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
sleeper
Joined: 07 Nov 2005
Posts: 67
|
 Posted: Thu Nov 13, 2008 9:40 pm Post subject: This is some hamburgers. |
 |
|
Hi, there.
When I was reading an American novel, I found some interesting sentences. A young guy in the story said the following sentences.
(1) This is automated things. We don't have to come out and physically water everything with a hose.
(2) This is some hamburgers we just ordered. Really good.
He used "This is + plural noun" expressions. But are these grammatically OK?
Do you often use these sentences in everyday conversation?
Why are these sentences possible?
I'm waiting for your answers.
Thanks. 
Last edited by sleeper on Sat Nov 15, 2008 5:32 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rice07
Joined: 26 Oct 2007
Posts: 385
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 3:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi,
I am sorry for having trouble understanding whether your question was " There is automated things,... and There is some hamburgers, ... "? If so, then let's see what Practical English Usage said:
There is can begin sentences with plural subjects in informal speech.
There is two policemen at the door, Dad.
There is some grapes in the fridge, if you are still hungry.
In an informal style, here's, there's and where's are common with plural nouns.
Here's your keys.
There's some children at the door.
Where's those books I lent you?
Hope that helps.
Good day!
sincerely
rice07 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Christine123
Joined: 15 Oct 2008
Posts: 90
Location: Indiana
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 15, 2008 10:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
I would like to add to what rice07 wrote.
Using the singular verb "is" with a plural subject is not Standard American English, although it is used in many dialects of English. I'm curious if the character in the book you are reading is a dialect speaker.
I felt the need to point this out because I somewhat disagree with your book's description, rice07. It could be interpreted that your book is implying that in formal situations, the plural verb "are" is used with plural subjects, and in informal situations the singular verb "is" is used with plural subjects. This is not necessarily true. This is more of an issue of the dialect of the speaker, than an issue of formality versus informality.
I hope that makes sense. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rice07
Joined: 26 Oct 2007
Posts: 385
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 10:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Christine123 wrote: |
I would like to add to what rice07 wrote
I felt the need to point this out because I somewhat disagree with your book's description, rice07. It could be interpreted that your book is implying that in formal situations, the plural verb "are" is used with plural subjects, and in informal situations the singular verb "is" is used with plural subjects. This is not necessarily true. This is more of an issue of the dialect of the speaker, than an issue of formality versus informality.
|
To some extent, I agree with you there. But the rules in the book I cited those resources from are descriptive of standard British English.
Here are some paragraphs excerpted from the book:
(Practical English Usage- Third Edition. Author: MICHAEL SWAN. OXFORD university press)
page 288
308 kinds of English (1): standard English and dialects
1. What is ' standard English '?
After King Alfred's victory over the Vikings in 878, the government of Southern England came to be established in London, wich later became the capital of the whole of Britain. Because of this, the English spoken in London and the East Midlands was gradually adopted as 'official' variety of English. And as time went by, this dialect (and its later developments, profoundly influenced by Norman French), became the 'standard' language- the form of English generally accepted for use in government, the law, the business, education and literature. Standard English, like all standard languages, is therefore largely the result of historical accident. If the Vikings, who held the north of England, had defeated Harold's army, the capital of modern Britain might well be York, and this book would be written in (and about) a very different kind of English.
2. What is a dialect?
Many people think that dialects are corrupted forms of a language, spoken by ignorant people who make mistakes because they have not learnt correct grammar. This is not at all true (for more about correctness, see 309). A standard language is not linguistically 'better' than other dialects; it is simply the dialect that has been adopted for official purposes such as government and education. All English dialects have a long history, going back to the distinct forms of speech of the Germanic and Scandinavian invaders who came from various parts of northern Europe to occupy Britain during the Middle Ages. And each of these dialeact has a grammar that is as rich and systematic as standard English, even though it may be very different. Some examples of English dialect forms:
I bain't ready. (= I'm not ready.)
He don't like it.
I wants a rest.
Where's them papers what I gave you?
Can you no help me? (= Can't you help me?)
They're not believing it.
She's after telling me. (= She's told me.)
Are youse coming or not? (= Are you- plural- coming or not?)
I ain't done nothing. (= I haven't done anything.)
page289
5. other standard forms of English
Standard British English is not, of course, the only standard form of English. American English also has a standard variety; this is different from standard British English in a number of ways (see 51). Other English-speaking countries, too, have their own standard versions of the language. Some of these are very close to British or American English: others (e.g. the developing Indian standard) are more clearly distinct.
page290
What kind of English should learners study?
For most learners, the best model is one or other of the two main standard varieties: British or American English. Neither of these is 'better'
than the other, and they are both used and understood worldwide. The differences are generally unimportant: for details, see 51.
7. international English
As English is used more and more as a language of international communication, it seems possible that a new form of international English may develop. This could be a ' super-standard', with characteristics of both British and American English. International could turn out to be simpler in some ways than the modern standard varieties, without some of their less important grammatical complications. It will be interesting to see what happens.
page 290
309 kinds of English (2): correctness
2. dialect forms
Many people think that dialects are corrupt versions of the standard language, and that dialect forms are mistakes, made by ignorant people who have not learnt correct grammar. In fact, this is not at all true (see 308.2): dialects have their own systematic- but different- grammars. Teachers in British schools often tell chirden whose dialects have mutiple negation, for example, that they are making mistakes if they say things like I ain't done nothing, because' two negatives make a positive' (so I ain't done nothing is supposed to mean' I have done something'). This is not, of course, the case: in the child's dialect, the sentence means ' I haven't done anything'. And if 'two negatives make a positive', then the teacher ought to be quite happy if the child says 'I ain't done nothing to nobody', since logically three negatives must make a positive! Dialect forms are not, therefore, incorrect in themselves. They are, however, out of place in styles where only the standard language is normally used. It would be inappropriate- in fact, incorrect- to use I wants, he don't or a double negative in a school essay, a job application, a newspaper article or a speech at a business conference.
page 291
3.divided usage
Speakers of as standard language often differ about small points of usage.
Where two different forms are common, people who use one form may claim that theirs is the only 'correct' usage, and that people who use the other form are making mistakes. Some examples from modern English:
so-called'only correct form'
John and I went to the cinema.
They're different from us.
fewer people
Somebody's dropped his or her keys.
I'm unemployed at present.
so-called 'mistake'
John and me went to the cinema.
They're different to us.
less people
Somebody's dropped their keys.
I'm unemployed presently.
In fact, all of the so-called 'mistakes' listed above have been normal in standard Englisg for centries, and are not wrong at all (though some of them are more informal than the so-called 'only correct forms', and would be out of place in a formal style). For details, see 429 (I and me), 155 (different), 320 (less) and 467(presently).
4.prescriptive and descriptive rules
If people say that less people or different to is wrong, they are following a prescriptive rule. Prescriptive rules are made by people who believe that they can improve a language, or protect it against change. A lot of prescriptive rules were made by eighteenth- and nineteenth-century British grammarians, often because they thought that English grammar should imitate Latin, which was considered a superior language. A typical example is the rule that 'split infinitives' like to boldly go, where an adverb is put between to and the verb, are wrong (a Latin infinitive is a single word, so cannot be split). Many people still believe this, and try to avoid spilt infinitives, although the rule is unrealistic (see 280.7). A similar rule said that sentences should not end in prepositions (as in What are you waiting for? or I don't like being shouted at.). In fact, it is quite normal for English sentences to end in prepositions (see 452). Most prescriptive rules give misleading information, and have little effect on the development of a language.
Descriptive rules simply say what happens in one form of a language (for example standard written British English, standard spoken American English, Yorkshire English, Dublin English or Singapore English), and not what some people feel ought to happen. The rules in this book are descriptive of standard British English.
5. When do mistakes become correct?
When somebody misuses a word or expression, this may influence other people to make the same mistake. Sometimes a mistake becomes so widespread that it becomes part of the language (this is one way in which languages develop), and we can no longer realistically call it a 'mistake'. The expression oblivious of, for example, originally meant 'forgetful of', but came to be used to mean 'unconcious of'. A hundred years ago this was still a mistake; now it is the normal use. The same thing is happening today with the expression a concerted effort. This means 'an effort by people working together', but some people now use it mistakenly to mean 'a strong effort'. If enough people follow the trend, this will sooner or later become the normal meaning, and the usage will have become correct.
----------------------------------------------
Mean no offence. In fact, your points are quite convincing, but I felt the need to clarify- similarly as you wrote  - what the book said relating to the question. Thanks for having the patience to help us with some of the English. I'm indebted to you, indeed. 
Good day
Sincerely
rice07 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lotus
Joined: 25 Jan 2004
Posts: 862
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 5:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Sleeper,
I think they are colloquial verbiage for:
(1) These are automated things (sprinklers). We don't have to come out and physically water everything with a hose.
(2) This is some (kind of) hamburger we just ordered! Really good.
--lotus
_________________
War does not make one great --Yoda |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
