0
English 1b3 Posted 14 years ago
Grammar
Awkard possessive case in a relative clause
If I want to talk about a magazine that I have forgotten the publications name of, I could write it as follows:
A magazine, the name of which evades me, listed the top 20 cities to visit in 2012.
A magazine, whose name evades me, listed the top 20 cities to visit in 2012.
However, is it still grammatical if I wish to specify that it is the magazine's publication name I have forgotten? It is awkward, but is it incorrect?
A magazine, the publication's name of which evades me, listed the top 20 cities to visit in 2012.
Thanks
A magazine, the name of which evades me, listed the top 20 cities to visit in 2012.
A magazine, whose name evades me, listed the top 20 cities to visit in 2012.
However, is it still grammatical if I wish to specify that it is the magazine's publication name I have forgotten? It is awkward, but is it incorrect?
A magazine, the publication's name of which evades me, listed the top 20 cities to visit in 2012.
Thanks
Top answer
That is wrong to insert 'publication' as well as redundant in concept—what other name could it have?
- That is wrong to insert 'publication' as well as redundant in concept—what other name could it have?
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
5 Answers
0
That is wrong to insert 'publication' as well as redundant in concept—what other name could it have?
00
In this case there would be no other name, but with other nouns besides 'magazine,' specificity may be required. Perhaps here's a better example:
The country, the name of which evades me, is one of my favorite places in the whole wide world.
The country, the capital city's name of which evades me, is one of my favorite places in the whole wide world.
And wi
The country, the name of which evades me, is one of my favorite places in the whole wide world.
The country, the capital city's name of which evades me, is one of my favorite places in the whole wide world.
And wi
00
The country, the capital city of which evades me, is one of my favorite places in the whole wide world.-- Though close logic invalidates this, it is common and I think acceptable. If it worries you, this seems fine to me, too: The country, whose capital city's name evades me, is one of my favorite places in the whole wide world.
Does that help?
Does that help?
00
Yes, it does, thanks. I saw no reason to reject either, although they do sound awfully funny, which I guess can be a reason in itself depending on the way you look at it...
Interesting that you accept 'whose' but not 'of which despite their interchangeability in most contexts.' I guess at the end of the day, you have to trust your ear. But we aren't all attuned now are we.
Interesting that you accept 'whose' but not 'of which despite their interchangeability in most contexts.' I guess at the end of the day, you have to trust your ear. But we aren't all attuned now are we.
00
'Of which' is always awkwardly formal or hyperformal; that is why we so often use the personal 'whose' even for inanimate subjects.
0
Related Questions