0
Riglos Posted 21 years ago
Grammar
The use of the genitive with inanimate objects.
Hi people!
This sentence was taken from one of David Crystal's (well-known linguist) books on the English Language:
"The design's asymmetries well represent the irregularities and erratic research paths which are so much a part of English language study." Here, we see an inanimate object being used in a possessive construction. I know that this is quite common, but some people still recommend avoiding the use of the inflected genitive with inanimate things. Indeed, I've seen people recommend it in this very forum. Contrary to this belief, there are other theories which support just the oppsoite, or rather, admit this use. Let me quote a definition of one type of genitive, the "descriptive":
"The descriptive genitive is one of several overlapping terms for some functions of the English genitive case different from those of the possessive genitive (as in Mary’s hat). The mountain’s top and a day’s pay are descriptive genitives. A few of the crustiest purists continue to argue that inanimate objects cannot use the genitive because they often cannot be said actually to possess the quality named, as in a day’s pay. In fact, the genitive case—in English as in Latin before it—has always had many more purposes than simply indicating possession, and descriptive (and other nonpossessive) genitives are and long have been Standard English."
Now, let me ask you these questions:
1. How can we distinguish between a descriptive genitive and a compound noun?
2. How can we decide whether it is better to use the inflected genitive, as in "the mountain's top" or the periphrastic genitive, as in "the top of the moutain"?
Furthermore, let me give five examples for you to decide how we should take them:
1a. Loading into memory non-resident programs as required is one task of the supervisor program.(= periphrastic genitive?)
1b. Loading into memory non-resident programs as required is one of the supervisor program's tasks. (= inflected genitive?)
1c. Loading into memory non-resident programs as required is one of the supervisor program tasks. (= compound noun?)
2a. Communicating directly with the hardware is the operating system role. (= compound noun?) I think this one's not possible, ciould you tell me why?
2b. Communicating directly with the hardware is the role of the operating system . (= periphrastic genitive?)
2c. Communicating directly with the hardware is the operating system's role. (= inflected genitive?)
3a. Supporting multiple programs and users is part of the mainframe operating sytems work. (= compound noun?) I think this construction is not possible for the other versions are quite clearer. Anyway, is it wrong?
3b. Supporting multiple programs and users is part of the work of mainframe operating sytems. (= periphrastic genitive?)
3c. Supporting multiple programs and users is part of the mainframe operating sytems' work. (= inflected genitive?)
4a. Allowing the computer to process data faster is the main reason for more memory installing. (= compound noun?) I think this one is utterly wrong, for the gerund, here "installing" should come first and, afterwards, its objects or complements. Is this explanation sound? Otherwise, the elements in the sentence are reversed, but is it acceptable anyway?
4b. Allowing the computer to process data faster is the main reason for installing more memory. IMO, this is the correct one.
4c. Allowing the computer to process data faster is the main reason for more memory's installing. Does'n sound fine at all.
5a. Processing quickly large amounts of data is one of the most important functions of a computer. IMO, this is the best option in this group.
5b. Processing quickly large amounts of data is one of the most important computer functions. Can we state it as a compound noun?
5c. Processing quickly large amounts of data is one of the most important computer's functions. Doesn't sound right, but don't know why. Any suggestions?
Thanks a lot!
Mara.
This sentence was taken from one of David Crystal's (well-known linguist) books on the English Language:
"The design's asymmetries well represent the irregularities and erratic research paths which are so much a part of English language study." Here, we see an inanimate object being used in a possessive construction. I know that this is quite common, but some people still recommend avoiding the use of the inflected genitive with inanimate things. Indeed, I've seen people recommend it in this very forum. Contrary to this belief, there are other theories which support just the oppsoite, or rather, admit this use. Let me quote a definition of one type of genitive, the "descriptive":
"The descriptive genitive is one of several overlapping terms for some functions of the English genitive case different from those of the possessive genitive (as in Mary’s hat). The mountain’s top and a day’s pay are descriptive genitives. A few of the crustiest purists continue to argue that inanimate objects cannot use the genitive because they often cannot be said actually to possess the quality named, as in a day’s pay. In fact, the genitive case—in English as in Latin before it—has always had many more purposes than simply indicating possession, and descriptive (and other nonpossessive) genitives are and long have been Standard English."
Now, let me ask you these questions:
1. How can we distinguish between a descriptive genitive and a compound noun?
2. How can we decide whether it is better to use the inflected genitive, as in "the mountain's top" or the periphrastic genitive, as in "the top of the moutain"?
Furthermore, let me give five examples for you to decide how we should take them:
1a. Loading into memory non-resident programs as required is one task of the supervisor program.(= periphrastic genitive?)
1b. Loading into memory non-resident programs as required is one of the supervisor program's tasks. (= inflected genitive?)
1c. Loading into memory non-resident programs as required is one of the supervisor program tasks. (= compound noun?)
2a. Communicating directly with the hardware is the operating system role. (= compound noun?) I think this one's not possible, ciould you tell me why?
2b. Communicating directly with the hardware is the role of the operating system . (= periphrastic genitive?)
2c. Communicating directly with the hardware is the operating system's role. (= inflected genitive?)
3a. Supporting multiple programs and users is part of the mainframe operating sytems work. (= compound noun?) I think this construction is not possible for the other versions are quite clearer. Anyway, is it wrong?
3b. Supporting multiple programs and users is part of the work of mainframe operating sytems. (= periphrastic genitive?)
3c. Supporting multiple programs and users is part of the mainframe operating sytems' work. (= inflected genitive?)
4a. Allowing the computer to process data faster is the main reason for more memory installing. (= compound noun?) I think this one is utterly wrong, for the gerund, here "installing" should come first and, afterwards, its objects or complements. Is this explanation sound? Otherwise, the elements in the sentence are reversed, but is it acceptable anyway?
4b. Allowing the computer to process data faster is the main reason for installing more memory. IMO, this is the correct one.
4c. Allowing the computer to process data faster is the main reason for more memory's installing. Does'n sound fine at all.
5a. Processing quickly large amounts of data is one of the most important functions of a computer. IMO, this is the best option in this group.
5b. Processing quickly large amounts of data is one of the most important computer functions. Can we state it as a compound noun?
5c. Processing quickly large amounts of data is one of the most important computer's functions. Doesn't sound right, but don't know why. Any suggestions?
Thanks a lot!
Mara.
Top answer
Riglos 1. How can we distinguish between a descriptive genitive and a compound noun? The descriptive Genative will be an inflected Genative using the apostrophe, just like the possessive.
- Riglos 1.
- How can we distinguish between a descriptive genitive and a compound noun?
- The descriptive Genative will be an inflected Genative using the apostrophe, just like the possessive.
- This appears to be an argument of semantics; the foundation of which rests in whether you accept the premise that inanimate objects can possess attributes.
- Riglos 2.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
8 Answers
0
Riglos1. How can we distinguish between a descriptive genitive and a compound noun?
The descriptive Genative will be an inflected Genative using the apostrophe, just like the possessive. This appears to be an argument of semantics; the foundation of which rests in whether you accept the premise that inanimate objects can possess attributes.
00
Hello Mara
This is not an answer to your question. This is just a comment on the question you raised.
All of what you are asking is exactly the things that have annoyed me long time since I began studying English. Some native speakers grudge that we ESLs are bad in using compound noun phrases. In my opinion, however, it is not our fault, but it is because English is chaotic abou
This is not an answer to your question. This is just a comment on the question you raised.
All of what you are asking is exactly the things that have annoyed me long time since I began studying English. Some native speakers grudge that we ESLs are bad in using compound noun phrases. In my opinion, however, it is not our fault, but it is because English is chaotic abou
00
Gee paco, you sure showed us yokels a thing or two.
Mara: paco has made some good points about the apparently chaotic nature of English, but worded it as if he were a three-year-old who had just been told he may not have a cookie. Besides which, parrots can speak facts, but can't seem to answer your question.
C
Mara: paco has made some good points about the apparently chaotic nature of English, but worded it as if he were a three-year-old who had just been told he may not have a cookie. Besides which, parrots can speak facts, but can't seem to answer your question.
C
00
Hi Paco,
I trust that this characterization of my ancestors as lazy, inconsiderate failures is intended purely in a linguistic sense? (ha-ha)
You're right that learning English can be frustrating.
Best wishes, Clive
I trust that this characterization of my ancestors as lazy, inconsiderate failures is intended purely in a linguistic sense? (ha-ha)
You're right that learning English can be frustrating.
Best wishes, Clive
00
Hi everybody and thanks for your comments!
The thing with the apparently chaotic nature of English is that it makes correcting and preparing classes a really hard task (at least for me)! The problem I'm usually faced with is: how am I supposed to correct this if there aren't clear rules about it? Luckily, you guys help me a lot! Since some of you have been teaching for some time now, I'd
The thing with the apparently chaotic nature of English is that it makes correcting and preparing classes a really hard task (at least for me)! The problem I'm usually faced with is: how am I supposed to correct this if there aren't clear rules about it? Luckily, you guys help me a lot! Since some of you have been teaching for some time now, I'd
00
Paco -- I'm sorry English is so frustrating! A few comments come to mind:
First, I can see how it seems to you that the current chaotic state of English is a result of generations of laziness regarding grammatical rules, but I would prefer to think of it this way: the current flexibility of the English language results from a process of natural evolution.
First, I can see how it seems to you that the current chaotic state of English is a result of generations of laziness regarding grammatical rules, but I would prefer to think of it this way: the current flexibility of the English language results from a process of natural evolution.
00
Hi guys,
Mara - I've never thought of English as chaotic. In my experience, it seems to have enough structure to take a reasonably methodical approach to teaching it. Two not very original suggestions I'd like to offer are these.
First, don't dwell unduly on exceptions to the rule, particularly with lower levels. Second, when faced with a purely idiomatic situation, and no good
Mara - I've never thought of English as chaotic. In my experience, it seems to have enough structure to take a reasonably methodical approach to teaching it. Two not very original suggestions I'd like to offer are these.
First, don't dwell unduly on exceptions to the rule, particularly with lower levels. Second, when faced with a purely idiomatic situation, and no good
00
Hello Khoff
It's really kind of you to console me that way. I don't think English is chaotic as a whole, but as far as the noun phrase formation is concerned, it looks as if chaotic at least to me. Anyway, I like your attitude towards non-native speakers' English. It would be the best if we could speak and write English as naturally as you can feel as if we were native speakers. But as f
It's really kind of you to console me that way. I don't think English is chaotic as a whole, but as far as the noun phrase formation is concerned, it looks as if chaotic at least to me. Anyway, I like your attitude towards non-native speakers' English. It would be the best if we could speak and write English as naturally as you can feel as if we were native speakers. But as f
0
Related Questions