There is / are .....

dduck · Post by **dduck** » Wed Dec 03, 2003 10:38 am

LarryLatham wrote:What I am poking my elbow into your ribs about, Iain, is your assertion, a few posts ago, that:

Today's breakfast is bacon and eggs.

is a "natural" sounding sentence.

I never said that it was natural sounding, I said that it was more natural sounding, there is a spectrum of difference.

I'm still insulted by your comments that I've spent too much time in Spain, and that restauranteurs are in someway cannot speak English, as if they are in some way inferior.

Lastly, comedy works both ways. If people tell you your jokes stink, you should find a new audience for your material or find some new material. If you start blaming the audience because they don't like you jokes, that is "I know I'm funny, why should I listen to those idiots?", then you're career in comedy in going to be short-lived.

Iain

LarryLatham · Post by **LarryLatham** » Wed Dec 03, 2003 4:05 pm

Alas, I've known for a long time that I have no future as a comic.

Larry Latham

wjserson · Post by **wjserson** » Wed Dec 03, 2003 8:45 pm

All the more reason to be happy of your career choice, Larry : that of an astonishing ESL teacher that always offers his educated, experienced and informed point of view in a light-hearted manner to those who are trying to achieve exactly what you have. The generous praise and aide you openly give to the fellow English teachers on this site has never been duplicated by anybody. We appreciate the fact that you're not a comic and thankful of you're presence here.

LarryLatham · Post by **LarryLatham** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 12:59 am

Shucks, Wjserson,

What a wonderful compliment. You certainly make me feel welcome here. But now I have to live up to your expectations.

I'll surely try!

Thanks,
Larry Latham

dduck · Post by **dduck** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 1:34 pm

I think we've all benefited from Larry's input. I think the stand-up material needs some tweaks, that all!

Iain

wjserson · Post by **wjserson** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 1:51 pm

Expectations, Larry? No. I'm speaking of what you've already accomplished and done. What the future holds for LL I can't pretend to know. It'll be pretty cool, though.

LarryLatham · Post by **LarryLatham** » Thu Dec 04, 2003 5:57 pm

Thank you so much, guys, for your encouragement.

All I can say is I thoroughly enjoy the give and take of working with people I can learn from and who are willing to share whatever I might bring to these discussions. Most of the time, I believe I take more out than I put in. Not only are many of you more deeply informed than I am, but I find that in working out how to word my posts, I am able sometimes to clarify my own ideas (or at least the ideas I've gained from somewhere...reading, talking, posting). At any rate, the pleasure is mine, and if there is occasionally something of value to any of you I might offer here, so much the better.

I'm not leaving anytime soon.

Larry Latham

Duncan Powrie · Post by **Duncan Powrie** » Sun Jan 11, 2004 10:24 pm

This is an interesting thread! It's a bit of a shame though that William from HK seems to have disappeared from it...I'd like to ask him (and the rest of you, for that matter!) why he seems to consider it less confusing for learners to have to learn TWO forms and worry about subject-verb agreement (even when it involves only one subject and is very "proximal", and to do with what should be a very "quickfire" functional item - "existential there"!), when they could learn only ONE form (There's...) and thus emulate native speakers more...but part of the answer is obviously that tests draw upon dated descriptions if not prescriptions and seek to maintain "standards". One thing I still need to think through, however, is how narrowing down to one exponent here will affect matters of clarity and consistency in the teaching of S-V agreement with "group"/collective nouns...anyone want to do the thinking for me or at least get me started?

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Mon Jan 12, 2004 1:12 am

I agree.

"Can I have a coffee?" is superb English.

Stephen Jones · Post by **Stephen Jones** » Mon Jan 12, 2004 7:08 pm

Look at this exchange:

"What is there to eat?"
"There's eggs, ham, criossants, bacon sandwiches, fruit salad and ice cream.

Now here we have the singular verb going next to the plural "eggs" so we don't have the excuse of proximity.

Now the explanation we can give here is either that the there is in the first sentence causes its repetition in the second, or, more likely, that "what there is to eat" which is considered a unit or amorphous mass as you will, is the antecedent of "there" and not the details that come afterwards.

As I've said in another thread, I'd teach kids always to use "there are" for more than one, and tell them they learn all about phrases like the one above after they've grown up and got married

[/b]

Lorikeet · Post by **Lorikeet** » Mon Jan 12, 2004 7:22 pm

I still think there is a trend toward making the contraction "There's" for "there is" also stand in for "There are". As I said in previous posts on this subject, I don't think it is currently "acceptable" by the powers that be, but it has been creeping in more and more. I cut out a newspaper headline with an example of that some years ago. Ever since then I have been listening to see when it is used. I've heard it used by native speakers on the radio, and in the faculty room

I've even heard myself use it, (Now that was a surprise

) although I'm not ready to claim it's common and I don't teach my students to use it. I wonder if the difficulty in pronouncing "there're" as a contraction (as compared to the ease of "there's") has helped lead to this, or if it is something deeper about the way "there is" and "there are" are used.

The kinds of sentences I've heard are:

I'm really hungry. What can I eat?
There's some cookies on the table. Why don't you have some of those?

Stephen Jones · Post by **Stephen Jones** » Mon Jan 12, 2004 7:35 pm

Funny but on the countable/uncountable thread we see how food challenges one's preconcieved ideas.

Does the breaking down of grammatical precepts with regards to food, have anything to do with the decline in table manners?

Stephen Jones · Post by **Stephen Jones** » Mon Jan 12, 2004 7:39 pm

Actually I think it has to do with the fact that what comes after the there is viewed as a collection, even though it may ba a collection of plural objects.

William · Post by **William** » Tue Jan 13, 2004 12:09 pm

Hello, everybody! In my school curriculum, there are two chapters about food that I needed to teach my Hong Kong students (at the age of eight). Everytime the food topic is mentioned, the countable and uncountable noun and determiner issues will come up naturally.

So I teach:

1) There are some apples.
2) There is some lettuce.
3) There are some apples and lettuce.
4) There is some lettuce and apples.

But I think #1,2,3 are good enough for my kids at this level. I don't bother to teach #4 although I think it is absolutely correct. So

5) "There are some lettuce and apples."

is correct too if I see it in their writing. I am not a dictator!

William

Duncan Powrie · Post by **Duncan Powrie** » Tue Jan 13, 2004 12:26 pm

Hey, can't "lettuce" have a plural -s ("There are some lettuces and apples")?

You seem to prefer to think of it as a chopped up uncountable mass (maybe in a salad), William! I'd prefer to focus on using e.g. quantifiers and plural -s consistently in counting, and let the issue of S-(existential there)V agreement "slide" (because it won't interfere with communication, whereas a preoccupation in the student's mind with accuracy where it is not strictly necessary might begin to do so!). I still haven't thought about how I might need to review my opinion in the light of S-V agreement with "collective" nouns, though (off the top of my head, I guess we should teach students to treat them as "singular" to be consistent, but it'll be interesting to look at what people actually say).