0
Taka Posted 22 years ago
Grammar
Which
The sentence:
About "which" above, what does it refer to? I think it's "world standerd English"; you see, hear, world standard English everywhere like on the news, magazines, whatever. And the features of regional English is tiny compared with those of standard English.
But my book says it's the (mass of) vacabulary and structure...
Which interpretation is correct?
Whatever the features of regional English are, they are tiny compared with the mass of vocabulary and structure of "world standard" English, which is within easy reach of all.
About "which" above, what does it refer to? I think it's "world standerd English"; you see, hear, world standard English everywhere like on the news, magazines, whatever. And the features of regional English is tiny compared with those of standard English.
But my book says it's the (mass of) vacabulary and structure...
Which interpretation is correct?
Top answer
Hi Taka, I agree that it is not at all clearly presented, but 'which' does refer to 'the mass (of vocabulary and structure)'-- by a process of logic, not grammar. It could refer equally to either 'mass' or 'WS English', grammatically. Furthermore, I am not enamoured of the semantics of 'the features.
- Hi Taka, I agree that it is not at all clearly presented, but 'which' does refer to 'the mass (of vocabulary and structure)'-- by a process of logic, not grammar.
- It could refer equally to either 'mass' or 'WS English', grammatically.
- Furthermore, I am not enamoured of the semantics of 'the features.
- .
- are tiny'-- it is the number of features that is small, not the features themselves.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
4 Answers
0
Hi Taka,
I agree that it is not at all clearly presented, but 'which' does refer to 'the mass (of vocabulary and structure)'-- by a process of logic, not grammar. It could refer equally to either 'mass' or 'WS English', grammatically.
Furthermore, I am not enamoured of the semantics of 'the features. . . are tiny'-- it is the number of features that is small, not the features
I agree that it is not at all clearly presented, but 'which' does refer to 'the mass (of vocabulary and structure)'-- by a process of logic, not grammar. It could refer equally to either 'mass' or 'WS English', grammatically.
Furthermore, I am not enamoured of the semantics of 'the features. . . are tiny'-- it is the number of features that is small, not the features
00
In other words, you mean by a process of logic it can't be "WS English"? Why not?
00
'Whatever the features of regional English are, they are tiny compared with the mass of vocabulary and structure of "world standard" English, which is within easy reach of all.'
Logically, what we would be trying to obtain is the vocabulary and structure, not the WS English itself-- we do not all have access to that English in use, but we can access the vocabulary, etc. That is what m
Logically, what we would be trying to obtain is the vocabulary and structure, not the WS English itself-- we do not all have access to that English in use, but we can access the vocabulary, etc. That is what m
00
Related Questions