Historical opinion is now split. Some scholars think
that the lack of contemporary accounts of Arthur mean
he is a later invention.
1. What about the absence of article before "Historical opinion"?
2. why do they write "mean" instead of "means"?
IMHO the lack of ... means...
-----Beginning of the citation-----
Historical opinion is now split. Some scholars think
that the lack of contemporary accounts of Arthur mean
he is a later invention.
----- The end of the citation -----
1. What about the absence of article before "Historical opinion"?
2. why do they write "mean" instead of "means"?
-----Beginning of the citation-----
Historical opinion is now split. Some scholars think that the lack
of contemporary accounts of Arthur mean he is a later invention.
----- The end of the citation -----
1. What about the absence of article before "Historical opinion"?
2. why do they write "mean" instead of "means"?
Not sure on #1. However, #2 I believe is because "mean" is the
plural form, in this case "lack of accounts mean." Accounts is
plural, so mean is also plural. If the sentence said "lack of a contemporary account," the writer would have used "means" instead
as account is singular.
At least that is how I was taught it.
[The lack of oxygen at this height saps power.]
"saps" is related to "lack" and oxygen doesn't make "lack"
uncountable.
or an uncountable form:
[Their apparent lack of progress mean they are not doing their job properly.]
[The lack of oxygen at this height saps power.] "saps" is related
to "lack" and oxygen doesn't make "lack" uncountable.
IMHO: saps is related to power. Power is the thing being sapped by
a lack of oxygen.
or an uncountable form:
[Their apparent lack of progress mean they are not doing their job
properly.]
IMHO: this is unnatural to a native speaker.
(I don't know where
Mike got his rule from, although it may be correct for 99.99% of
cases in his locale.) The passage should read: "... lack of
progress means they are not...".
It could be countable, in either
the case of there being many (persons) involved, or in the singular
case of one person, when speaking of 'their'. English can be
annoyingly imprecise at times.
But "lack" is the subject, and "saps" is the predicate to "lack"
So, "Their apparent lack of progress MEANS they are not doing their
job properly." -- here we have "lack" uncountable.
[a lack of food]
here we use "lack" as singular noun.
IMHO: this is unnatural to a native speaker. (I don't know where Mike got his >rule from, although it may be correct for 99.99% of cases in his locale.) The >passage should read: "...lack of progress means they are not...". It could be >countable, in either the case of there being many (persons) involved, or in the
singular case of one person, when speaking of 'their'. English can be >annoyingly imprecise at times. 8-)
If we apply Mike's rule we'll see that "progress" is an uncountable noun, as >should be "lack", and, therefore, it should be "lack of progress MEAN they are >not..." So the rule is not working.
English can be annoyingly imprecise at times. 8-)
That is how I would also say it, as lack is singular. :)
If we apply Mike's rule we'll see that "progress" is an
uncountable noun, as should be "lack", and, therefore, it should
be "lack of progress MEAN they are not..." So the rule is not
working.
No, it would be lack and means. I may be using "singular"
and "uncountable" interchangably (and incorrectly!), but I would
use MEANS in your example also.
Water erode rock.
but in reality
"Water erodes rock."
-----Beginning of the citation-----
Historical opinion is now split. Some scholars think
that the lack of contemporary accounts of Arthur mean
he is a later invention.
----- The end of the citation -----
1. What about the absence of article before "Historical
opinion"?
2. why do they write "mean" instead of "means"?
IMHO the lack of ... means...
I may be using "singular" and "uncountable" interchangably
(and incorrectly!), but I would use MEANS in your example
also.
I may be using "singular" and "uncountable" interchangably
(and incorrectly!), but I would use MEANS in your example
also.
IMHO your usage is correct, although you're not sure how to explain it. Maybe I can help a bit re the latter.... :-)
As a native speaker, you may not have heard the terms "countable" &
"uncountable" in school. I think I probably learned them from Alexander. But >you may recall being taught about stuff which is usually measured by weight or >by volume... e.g. various liquids, meat/fish/poultry, cheese, and salt because >it's okay to say "less" whereas with countable objects one should say "fewer".
I reckon where some of the confusion lies is that we treat abstract
nouns as singular. Your teachers & mine may not have gone into detail re such >concepts because... while the average student in junior high is experiencing a >phase of rapid brain growth which is the ideal time to introduce them... other >students will claim loudly & adamantly that abstract nouns don't exist because >Miss Grinch in grade three never mentioned them. OTOH, the common parlance is >rife with examples many native speakers will have seen or heard before:
As a native speaker, you may not have heard the terms
"countable" & "uncountable" in school. I think I
probably learned them from Alexander. But you may
recall being taught about stuff which is usually
measured by weight or by volume... e.g. various
liquids, meat/fish/poultry, cheese, and salt because
it's okay to say "less" whereas with countable objects
one should say "fewer".
Thanks, I am not sure I did ever hear those terms used,
but you have successfully reminded me of the difference
between using "less" and "fewer." I shall have to admit
that it this part of the US, you are not likely to hear
"fewer" used much...
I am not certain that we spent much time on abstract nouns,
either. We did learn that they could be used as nouns but
I don't think much emphasis was put on the "abstract" bit.
Sysop: | Zazz |
---|---|
Location: | Mesquite, Tx |
Users: | 7 |
Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
Uptime: | 122:07:58 |
Calls: | 157 |
Files: | 2,113 |
Messages: | 145,905 |