Requesting help for a scientific report

Question

Hello. This has been a source of contention in my laboratory for years. We are trying to determine the proper way to phrase the results of our testing. The options are:
Smith and Jones cannot be excluded as a contributor to this profile.
or
Smith and Jones cannot be excluded as contributors to this profile.

If you are able to provide support for why one option is correct over the other, it would go a long way in helping to convince the non-believers.

Thanks in advance.

Clive · Accepted Answer

Smith and Jones are two people, so say 'contributors'. It seems to me as simple as that.

Or you could say eg that the paper by Smith and Jones is one of your sources.
Or refer to 'the research by Smith and Jones.'

AlpheccaStars · Answer

I don't know what you mean by "profile."
Here are two alternatives that seem reasonable.
Neither Smith nor Jones can be excluded as a contributor to this research. (individual contributions)
Smith and Jones cannot be excluded as contributors to this research. (partnership contribution)

Pjfan01 · Answer

Part of the reason we go back and forth is that depending on the case, sometimes the profile can only have one contributor, other times it could have more than one contributor. Does the compound subject, 'Smith and Jones', change the object of the verb ('is/are excluded')?

It seems incorrect to say that "Smith and Jones are excluded as contributors" (as stated in the reply above), when there can only be a single contributor to that profile. Does the usage of "contributors" imply that there could be more than one contributor?

Contrast this with times when the profile could have multiple contributors. In this circumstance, saying "Smith and Jones cannot be excluded as contributors" makes sense, but "Smith and Jones cannot be excluded as a contributor" does not. I don't feel that the confusion comes from the fact that Smith and Jones are two people, which effects the first part of the predicate ('are excluded' vs. 'is excluded'). But I'm confused about whether it has any relevance on the second part of the predicate ('a contributor to' vs. 'contributors to'), since that is determined by the type of profile, not the subject of the sentence.

Am I overthinking this?

Pjfan01 · Answer

In this specific circumstance, we are referring to contributors to a DNA profile. A DNA profile can be attributed to either a single person (single source DNA profile) or can be made up of 2 or more contributors (mixed source DNA profile). In either circumstance, we are referring to a single distinct profile. I believe the confusion stems from the fact that number of people in the subject ('Smith' vs 'Smith and Jones) has no impact on whether or not the profile has one or more contributors. The profile is what it is, we are just reporting a fact about each person by combining their result into one sentence.

I wrote this up to try to help me explain my thinking to those that disagree. I first wrote the statement as two separate sentences, I then wrote these as a compound subject without changing the predicate, which still sounds correct to me. The last sentence in each group is only changing "contributor" to "contributors", and neither of these sound correct.

Profile has a single contributor:
Smith cannot be excluded as the contributor of this profile. Jones cannot be excluded as the contributor of this profile.
Smith and Jones cannot be excluded as the contributor of this profile.
Smith and Jones cannot be excluded as the contributors of this profile. (Cannot have more than one contributor to a single source profile, otherwise this would sound correct.)

Profile has multiple contributors:
Smith cannot be excluded as a contributor to this profile. Jones cannot be excluded as a contributor to this profile.
Smith and Jones cannot be excluded as a contributor to this profile.
Smith and Jones cannot be excluded as a contributors to this profile. (Number disagreement in the sentence.)

AlpheccaStars · Answer

pjfan01Does the usage of "contributors" imply that there could be more than one contributor?

The problem is the word contributor. Contribute has the idea of many people combining their individual resources to something, or being one factor (of many) in a situation.
This http://www.dictionary.com/browse/contribute?s=t includes the idiom, contribute to
to be an important factor in; help to cause: A sudden downpour contributed to the traffic jam.

Clive · Answer

If you just speak of Smith and Jones, you are treating them as two people.

You could consider rewording a bit to say
eg the paper / research / profile by Smith and Jones cannot be excluded as a contribution.

Clive · Answer

I wrote the above before your made your detailed post starting with 'In this specific circumstance, we are referring to contributors to a DNA profile'.

In cases where your terminology gets a bit unusual, it's often wise to begin by defining your special usage of terms.
eg When we say 'Smith', we mean . . . .
eg When we say 'Smith and Jones', we mean . . .

AlpheccaStars · Answer

Single source profile:
Smith and Jones cannot be excluded as sources of this profile. (There is not enough information to eliminate them as a potential source.)

Multiple source profile:
Smith and Jones cannot be excluded as contributors to this profile. (There is not enough information to eliminate them as a potential contributor.)

Requesting help for a scientific report

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions