| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
sejpdw
Joined: 26 Oct 2005
Posts: 217
Location: Korea
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 12:27 am Post subject: Nor |
 |
|
" Perhaps the most interesting side development of music in the twentieth century is jazz. There has never been anything else quite like it. There have been man other side developments of music like gypsy music, brass band music, accordion music-but nothing with the great attraction and drive of jazee. Nor has any form of music ever so much written about it both cricically and historically. "
I think in the final setence "been" has to be used between "music" and "ever" and final "it" refers to "any form of music".
If the given sentence is grammatically right, what's the meaning of that sentence and what does final "it" refer to? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dragn
Joined: 17 Feb 2009
Posts: 450
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Nor has any form of music ever so much written about it both critically and historically. |
It does refer to form of music; however, a word has been inadvertently omitted from the sentence . . . but not been. Forget been--trying to use been will lead to a more awkward sentence. The best and easiest way to fix this is to simply insert had between ever and so:
Nor has any form of music ever had so much written about it both critically and historically.
I can state with virtual certainty that this is what the writer meant to say, but somehow the word had got omitted. With that one inclusion, you have a perfect gem of a sentence that you'd be hard-pressed to improve upon.
If someone put a knife to my throat and forced me to use been here, this is about the best I could come up with:
Nor has any form of music ever been written about so much both critically and historically.
Grammatically correct, but . . . goodbye best seller list, hello rejection slip. 
Greg |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sejpdw
Joined: 26 Oct 2005
Posts: 217
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 6:34 pm Post subject: had |
|
|
Thank your advice.
I have another question to you.
What's the grammatical function of "had" in that sentence ?
If "had" has to be used to make a "present perfect tense", "has written" seems to be already proper to that tense.
What's the tense of suggested sentence and why do we have to use that tense? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dragn
Joined: 17 Feb 2009
Posts: 450
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well, hello there...I was beginning to wonder if there was a real flesh-and-blood person behind your posts.
You're right about the present perfect, but I just don't q-u-i-t-e get the second part of the second question.
Yes, the sentence is in the present perfect. Do you have to use that? Well, it fits the situation the best. I'm not sure if any other verb tense could be used to good effect here. The idea is that from the indefinite past up until now, more things have been written about jazz than any other form of music. This is an ideal situation for the present perfect.
If you can get this sentence, that's good because it's not an especially easy sentence.
Also, see my response to your more recent question that asks about this same sentence.
Greg |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
