Is this grammatically correct?
Dina
Is the above grammatically correct?
Do we have to add "the" before positive to make it correct?
Thanks in advance
Best regards,\
Lisa
Skitt
That would depend on the rest of the sentence which isn't shown.
--
Skitt (SF Bay Area)
http://come.to/skitt
Bohgosity BumaskiL
> Positive consequences of cycling...
>
> Is the above grammatically correct?
Yes.
> Do we have to add "the" before positive to make it correct?
Absolutely not. If you can cut out a definite article and the sentence
is still clear, then that sentence is more correct *without* a
definite article. Definite relates to definitive example. Its meaning
is severely watered down in English for over-use. "The one and only"
is a redundancy.
In jeneral:
If you can cut out "the", then do it.
If you can cut a word out, then always cut it out.
--George Orwell
If you can replace "the" with "a", then do it.
If you can replace "the" with "that" or "this", then do it.
> Thanks in advance
> Best regards,\
> Lisa
_______
http://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/
Stephen
> Dina wrote:
>> Positive consequences of cycling...
>>
>> Is the above grammatically correct?
>
> Yes.
>
>> Do we have to add "the" before positive to make it correct?
>
> Absolutely not. If you can cut out a definite article and the sentence
> is still clear, then that sentence is more correct *without* a definite
> article.
I don't think this is reliable advice. Clarity is not the first
requirement of grammar. Form is the first requirement.
Quick brown fox jumped over lazy dog.
Fine for shorthand but not good, formal English.
Definite relates to definitive example. Its meaning is severely
> watered down in English for over-use. "The one and only" is a redundancy.
In this instance "the" must be retained. It may be redundant, but idiom
requires it.
>
> In jeneral:
> If you can cut out "the", then do it.
It's very important to know which indefinite articles may be omitted and
which may not.
>
> If you can cut a word out, then always cut it out.
> --George Orwell
Orwell did say that, but he had other rules as well. What was the last
one in his set?
>
> If you can replace "the" with "a", then do it.
> If you can replace "the" with "that" or "this", then do it.
No; these suggestions will lead to error and should be disregarded.
--
Stephen
Ballina, NSW
Don Phillipson
news:zHfOp.7497$aH5....@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
> I don't think this is reliable advice. Clarity is not the first
> requirement of grammar. Form is the first requirement.
This conflicts with the general consensus that English
grammar is chiefly negative, proscribing incorrect forms
but prescribing no correct ones, except within the context
of clarity. This would suggest clarity governs form. Can
good reasons be found for your conclusion?
--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)
Mike Lyle
wrote:
Impressively courteous. My initial response was "Bollocks!"
--
Mike.
Stephen
Normally, yes.
--
Stephen
Ballina, NSW
Stephen
Clarity achieved can be minus grammaticalness. Choice to be ungrammatic
in pursuing purpose of clarity unavailable.
--
Stephen
Ballina, NSW
Stephen
> It's very important to know which indefinite articles may be omitted and
>>which may not.
>>
I should have made it clear that this applies to both definite and
indefinite articles. And, yes, we were discussing definite articles at
the time.
--
Stephen
Ballina, NSW