[visionlist] [cvnet] [External] Re: Abbreviations

Jeff Mulligan jbmull at gmail.com
Fri Apr 29 14:00:21 -05 2022


The LA Times agrees with Gislin:

https://www.latimes.com/socal/daily-pilot/opinion/tn-dpt-xpm-2013-07-22-tn-dpt-me-0725-casagrande-20130722-story.html#:~:text=But%20Webster's%20also%20defines%20%E2%80%9Cnone,none%20were%E2%80%9D%20can%20be%20correct.
<https://www.latimes.com/socal/daily-pilot/opinion/tn-dpt-xpm-2013-07-22-tn-dpt-me-0725-casagrande-20130722-story.html#:~:text=But%20Webster's%20also%20defines%20%E2%80%9Cnone,none%20were%E2%80%9D%20can%20be%20correct.'>

On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 11:56 AM Gislin Dagnelie via cvnet <
cvnet at lawton.ewind.com> wrote:

> IMHO, and admittedly as a non-native speaker, "none" is the linguistic
> equivalent of an empty set, so one can assign either singular or plural to
> it.
> Neither is wrong, but plural is definitely the common choice.  Anyone with
> more
> linguistic knowledge, please weigh in.
>
> Gislin
>
>
> On 29 Apr 2022 at 17:56, Todd, James via cvnet <todd.44 at osu.edu> wrote:
>
> I'm sure you are both correct in terms of formal grammar, but "none of
> them was
> removed" sounds weird to my ear, because "was" immediately follows "them".
> I'd
> be curious to know statistically what form of the verb the average speaker
> of
> English would use in that context. The verb change associated with the
> subjunctive is also grammatically correct, but most English speakers do
> not use
> it, at least in the US.
>
> Jim Todd
> ________________________________
> From: Lewis, Terri <lewistl at mcmaster.ca>
> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2022 1:20 PM
> To: Todd, James <todd.44 at osu.edu>
> Cc: Brian Timney <timney at uwo.ca>; Johnson, Chris A <
> chris-a-johnson at uiowa.edu>;
> vabillock <vabillock at att.net>; cvnet at mail.ewind.com <cvnet at mail.ewind.com
> >;
> visionlist at visionscience.com <visionlist at visionscience.com>
>
> As much as I hate to point out your grammatical error, Todd, I shall. The
> sentence toward the end stating " none of them were" should be " none of
> them was" because the subject is singular. Sent from Terri´s iPhone
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cvnet mailing list
> cvnet at lawton.ewind.com
> https://lawton.ewind.com/mailman/listinfo/cvnet
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://visionscience.com/pipermail/visionlist_visionscience.com/attachments/20220429/e747b352/attachment.html>


More information about the visionlist mailing list