0
Gormenghast Posted 21 years ago
Grammar

Just a question on the use of personal pronouns...

0 He thought back to what it must have been like for Mr. Jensen when he first picked up a Wall Street Journal at his first job as a quote marker back in the early 1920's. 02br
02br
00The first He is supposed to be a personal pronoun referring to a person who was the subject of previous sentences. The second he (it follows the word "when") is supposed to refer to Mr. Jensen. My question is: is this correct? Because I am a bit confused. From reading it I cannot tell whether the second he is interpreted by the reader to be a reiteration of the first He, or whether it is interpretedby the reader to refer to Mr. Jensen. The tenses don't change since both the regular narration and the thought(s) of the first He are both in the past tense. So, is this correct, or not, and even if this is technically correct is there a more "proper" or less confusing way to write it? Or should I not even be getting confused.... 02br
02br
00Thanks 0-
  

Top answer

0 Hi, 02br 00I'd say your interpretation is technically correct, but I'd also agree with your feeling that it is confusing. 02br 02br 00I might say: 02br 00'He thought back to what it must have been like for Mr. ' 02br 02br 00or maybe recast the sentence a bit: 02br 00'He thought back to Mr.

— Clive

  • 0 Hi, 02br 00I'd say your interpretation is technically correct, but I'd also agree with your feeling that it is confusing.
  • 02br 02br 00I might say: 02br 00'He thought back to what it must have been like for Mr.
  • ' 02br 02br 00or maybe recast the sentence a bit: 02br 00'He thought back to Mr.
  • ' 02br 02br 00Best wishes, 02br 00Clive 0-
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

7 Answers
0
0 Hi, 02br
00I'd say your interpretation is technically correct, but I'd also agree with your feeling that it is confusing. 02br
02br
00I might say: 02br
00'He thought back to what it must have been like for Mr. Jensen when the latter first picked up a Wall Street Journal at his first job as a quote marker back in the early 1920's.' 02br
02b
0
0
0 The alternate interpretation has him, the thinker, thinking back at the time when he, the thinker, first picked up a Wall Street Journal at his first job, the thinker's first job, in the early 1920's. 02br
02br
00This leaves Mr. Jensen hanging about as pretty much irrelevant to anything else in the sentence. At this point we need to ask ourselves if anyone would seriously
0
0
0 Hi, 02br
00Technically, should a pronoun not be considered to relate to the most-recently mentioned and suitable noun? If so, that simple rule could easily be programmed into a transation machine. 02br
00Clive 0-
0
0
0 Thanks for the replies guys, I think my concerns about the sentence have been cleared up, and it makes sense to me when I read it now. 0-
0
0
0 Hi, Clive, 02br
02br
00I think your general rule usually works, but if we both tried hard enough (and my brain is not feeling up to it at the moment), I'm sure we could invent quite a few counterexamples. 02br
02br
00I think we know instinctively what's what (and who's who) in the following, for example: 02br
02br
00He told his brothe
0
0
0 Hi Jim, 02br
00Yeah, you're right, of course. 02br
00I find it a little confusing to my mind on this forum, occasionally, because sometimes we seem to be talking about grammar rules in a strict sense and other times we are talking about actual usage, even instinct if you like. I guess that's what makes it such an interesting, challenging and enjoyable subject! 02br
0
0
GormenghastHe thought back to what it must have been like for Mr. Jensen when he first picked up a Wall Street Journal at his first job as a quote marker back in the early 1920's.

The first He is supposed to be a personal pronoun referring to a person who was the subject of previous sentences. The second he (it follows the word "when") is supposed to refer to Mr
0

Related Questions