0
Taka Posted 17 years ago
Grammar
Subject verb agreement
When the subject is '(the) A or B', the verb agrees with the noun 'B'.
Is it also true when '(the) A or B' is followed by a relative pronoun 'which/who/that' (i.e. '(the) A or B which/who/that...')?
Is it also true when '(the) A or B' is followed by a relative pronoun 'which/who/that' (i.e. '(the) A or B which/who/that...')?
Top answer
Anyone?
- Anyone?
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
22 Answers
0
0
Can you give a specific example?
It is difficult to answer generalities, but I don't think that a relative clause changes the rule.
Jon or his friends who live in a big house are planning the trip.
Jon or his friend who drives the flashy hot rod is planning the trip.
It is difficult to answer generalities, but I don't think that a relative clause changes the rule.
Jon or his friends who live in a big house are planning the trip.
Jon or his friend who drives the flashy hot rod is planning the trip.
00
AlpheccaStarsJon or his friends who live in a big house are planning the trip.Did you use those relative pronouns as the modifiers of both 'Jon' and 'his friend(s)', AS?
Jon or his friend who drives the flashy hot rod is planning the trip.
00
With "or" as the conjunction, the relative clause only refers to the direct antecedent.
If you say "and", then it applies to both together.
That being said, I don't think this is good writing style because of the ambiguity. I would put the qualification in a separate sentence for clarity.
If you say "and", then it applies to both together.
That being said, I don't think this is good writing style because of the ambiguity. I would put the qualification in a separate sentence for clarity.
00
AlpheccaStarsWith "or" as the conjunction, the relative clause only refers to the direct antecedent.What I have is this:
If you say "and", then it applies to both together.
I think the parent who is with the children during the day should take care of the correcting, scolding, or punishing that is called for at the time. Only
00
0
I think I would say:
1. You should take care of the correcting, scolding or punishing that is called for at the time
2. You should take care of the correcting, scolding or punishments that are called for at the time
3. You should take care of the punishments, correcting, or scolding that are called for at the time
All the best,
MrP
1. You should take care of the correcting, scolding or punishing that is called for at the time
2. You should take care of the correcting, scolding or punishments that are called for at the time
3. You should take care of the punishments, correcting, or scolding that are called for at the time
All the best,
MrP
00
TakaI think the parent who is with the children during the day should take care of the correcting, scolding, or punishing that is called for at the time. Only unusual misbehavior needs to be reported later.This is the "ambiguity" that I mentioned in the last posting. It raises all sorts of questions on the meaning.
Here is a rephrasing whch cl
00
MrPedanticI think I would say:
1. You should take care of the correcting, scolding or punishing that is called for at the time
2. You should take care of the correcting, scolding or punishments that are called for at the time
3. You should take care of the punishments, correcting, or scolding that are called for at the time
All the best
00
It seems so to me. Cf.
1. The eggs, milk or cheese are to be purchased only from the farm shop.
An "is" would sound odd to me (but perhaps not to others).
1. The eggs, milk or cheese are to be purchased only from the farm shop.
An "is" would sound odd to me (but perhaps not to others).
0
Related Questions