writing style
fyf...@gmail.com
(1) His writing style is superior to that of any expert's I have seen.
(2) His writing style is superior to what I have seen is produced by
the experts.
Don Phillipson
news:292043d2-4d4b-4ace...@k13g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
Case (2) is flawed:
-- We prefer THAT to WHAT in constructions like this.
-- Case (2) has three distinct verbs i.e. three distinct
clauses, but only imperfectly connected. The second
IS is redundant i.e. its removal would improve the sentence.
The main error in Case (1) is the apostrophe. When the
sentence includes the possessive phrase OF EXPERTS
the possessive apostrophe in EXPERT'S is redundant.
--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)
Peter Moylan
> Is there anything ungrammatical in the following sentences?
>
> (1) His writing style is superior to that of any expert's I have seen.
It should be "of any expert", but apart from that this is a good sentence.
It is possible that some native users of English would use the double
genitive here - that is, write it the way you have, with both the "of"
and the "'s", so some people would judge your sentence to be
grammatically acceptable.
> (2) His writing style is superior to what I have seen is produced by
> the experts.
I'm having trouble deciding whether this is grammatically correct, but
it's not what native speakers would write. You should have "what I have
seen produced", without the "is".
--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.
Glenn Knickerbocker
> fyf...@gmail.com wrote:
> > (1) His writing style is superior to that of any expert's I have seen.
>
> It should be "of any expert", but apart from that this is a good sentence.
No, he really does mean "expert's"--what he's seen is the writing, not
the expert. There's a problem of parallelism, though. If "writing"
were clearly an attributive noun, it wouldn't be so bad, but since it
can just as easily be construed as a participle it makes the
relationship confusing. I'd straighten it out by using a parallel
prepositional phrase: "The style of his writing" etc.
�R
Leslie Danks
> Peter Moylan wrote:
>> fyf...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > (1) His writing style is superior to that of any expert's I have
>> > seen.
>>
>> It should be "of any expert", but apart from that this is a good
>> sentence.
>
> No, he really does mean "expert's"--what he's seen is the writing, not
> the expert.
I disagree. The point is that two possessives are one too many. One could
logically ask "Superior to any expert's what?"
I would write: "His writing style is superior to any I have seen from an
expert."
> There's a problem of parallelism, though. If "writing"
> were clearly an attributive noun, it wouldn't be so bad, but since it
> can just as easily be construed as a participle it makes the
> relationship confusing. I'd straighten it out by using a parallel
> prepositional phrase: "The style of his writing" etc.
Hmm. What is a "style" that can write?
--
Les (BrE)
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
wrote:
This sort (OED):
style, n.
1. a. Antiq. An instrument made of metal, bone, etc., having one end
sharp-pointed for incising letters on a wax tablet, and the other
flat and broad for smoothing the tablet and erasing what is written:
= STYLUS 1. Also applied to similar instruments in later use.
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Leslie Danks
> On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 18:48:58 +0100, Leslie Danks <leslie...@aon.at>
> wrote:
[...]
>>Hmm. What is a "style" that can write?
> This sort (OED):
>
> style, n.
> 1. a. Antiq. An instrument made of metal, bone, etc., having one end
> sharp-pointed for incising letters on a wax tablet, and the other
> flat and broad for smoothing the tablet and erasing what is written:
> = STYLUS 1. Also applied to similar instruments in later use.
Aha! Did you use one with a USB interface to write your post?
--
Les (BrE)
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
wrote:
>Peter Duncanson (BrE) wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 18:48:58 +0100, Leslie Danks <leslie...@aon.at>
>> wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>>>Hmm. What is a "style" that can write?
>
>> This sort (OED):
>>
>> style, n.
>> 1. a. Antiq. An instrument made of metal, bone, etc., having one end
>> sharp-pointed for incising letters on a wax tablet, and the other
>> flat and broad for smoothing the tablet and erasing what is written:
>> = STYLUS 1. Also applied to similar instruments in later use.
>
>Aha! Did you use one with a USB interface to write your post?
One has to keep up with developments in writing technology.
Glenn Knickerbocker
> Glenn Knickerbocker wrote:
> > No, he really does mean "expert's"--what he's seen is the writing, not
> > the expert.
> I disagree. The point is that two possessives are one too many. One could
> logically ask "Superior to any expert's what?"
Superior to the style of any expert's writing. Didn't I just say that?
�R
fyf...@gmail.com
+aue200...@nospam.firedrake.org> wrote:
> fyfp...@gmail.com wrote:
> >Is there anything ungrammatical in the following sentences?
>
> >(1) His writing style is superior to that of any expert's I have seen.
>
> rather than the product of the expert...)
How about "His writing style is superior to any expert's I have
seen."?
>
> >(2) His writing style is superior to what I have seen is produced by
> >the experts.
>
> Delete the second "is". I'd prefer this to the first formulation.
>
If you take away the "is", do you need to replace the 'what' with
'that'?
"His writing style is superior to that (I have seen) produced by the
experts."
To phrase it in another way, it will be:
"His writing style is superior to that produced by the experts,
according to what I have seen."
==================
Right/Wong???
> --
> Roger BW - BrE
fyf...@gmail.com
> <fyfp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:292043d2-4d4b-4ace...@k13g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Is there anything ungrammatical in the following sentences?
>
> > (1) His writing style is superior to that of any expert's I have seen.
>
> > (2) His writing style is superior to what I have seen is produced by
> > the experts.
>
> Case (2) is flawed:
> -- We prefer THAT to WHAT in constructions like this.
Would it be grammatically incorrect if WHAT were used?
Please take a look at the following sentence:
"Despite the descrepancies I have had in relation to 'what' other
teachers have
understood of the proper protocol used in writing job applications, I
have always
been known as a generous marker."
Should the WHAT above be replaced by THAT?
Leslie Danks
No, you didn't. If you expand the original sentence you get:
(1) His writing style is superior to that of any expert's style of writing
I have seen.
or, expanding further:
(1) His writing style is superior to [the writing style] of any expert's
style of writing I have seen.
In other words, the extra possessive means that "his writing style"
belongs to "any expert's style of writing" and not to "any expert".
--
Les (BrE)
aquachimp
> Is there anything ungrammatical in the following sentences?
>
> (1) His writing style is superior to that of any expert's I have seen.
Consider;
His writing style is superior to that of any expert's efforts I have
seen.
His writing style is superior to that of any expert efforts I have
seen.
>
> (2) His writing style is superior to what I have seen is produced by
> the experts.
omit "is"
fyf...@gmail.com
wrote:
> On Nov 10, 1:27 pm, "fyfp...@gmail.com" <fyfp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Is there anything ungrammatical in the following sentences?
>
> > (1) His writing style is superior to that of any expert's I have seen.
>
> Consider;
> His writing style is superior to that of any expert's efforts I have
> seen.
How about "His writing style is superior to any expert's I have
seen.".
aquachimp
> On 11月11日, 下午6时17分, aquachimp <aquach...@aquachimp.freeserve.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 10, 1:27 pm, "fyfp...@gmail.com" <fyfp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Is there anything ungrammatical in the following sentences?
>
> > > (1) His writing style is superior to that of any expert's I have seen.
>
> > Consider;
> > His writing style is superior to that of any expert's efforts I have
> > seen.
>
> How about "His writing style is superior to any expert's I have
> seen.".
>
>
Hmm, interesting because I would have thought it to be not as good as
your original because of how the "that of" in that version compliments
the possessive 's in expert's, but I now see, or perhaps should say;
°think I see°, that omiting the "th
aquachimp
wrote:
> On Nov 13, 8:07 am, "fyfp...@gmail.com" <fyfp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 11月11日, 下午6时17分, aquachimp <aquach...@aquachimp.freeserve.co.uk>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 10, 1:27 pm, "fyfp...@gmail.com" <fyfp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Is there anything ungrammatical in the following sentences?
>
> > > > (1) His writing style is superior to that of any expert's I have seen.
>
> > > Consider;
> > > His writing style is superior to that of any expert's efforts I have
> > > seen.
>
> > How about "His writing style is superior to any expert's I have
> > seen.".
>
> Hmm, interesting because I would have thought it to be not as good as
> your original because of how the "that of" in that version compliments
> the possessive 's in expert's, but I now see, or perhaps should say;
> °think I see°, that omiting the "th
>
Sorry about that, I really need to find out what I must be
accidentally pressing on my keyboard that causes a post to get sent
mid-sentence.
As I was saying:
I find it interesting because I would have thought it to be not as
good as
your original on account of how the "that of" in that version
compliments
the possessive 's in expert's, but I now see, or perhaps should say;
°think I see°, that omitting the "that of" removes a visual
distraction; But th
aquachimp
darn, this is unbelievable. I now glare at the keyboard throughout and
only realised later that I had already sent that.
I was just trying to add that that visual distraction suggestion might
really be just me.
Either way, without a qualifier such as "expert's efforts" or
"expert's writing" you are likely to constantly get someone thinking
the 's is an punctuation error even though what you are applying is
an omission which, where it a sentence involving a fence post and a
rose in between :
"A rosebush between each fence post"
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.usage.english/browse_thread/thread/3793781bddd1631/711ec4932e37c73c?lnk=gst&q=rose++between+post#711ec4932e37c73c