[visionlist] visionlist Digest, Vol 64, Issue 36
Lisa Marun
lisamarun at gmail.com
Sat Apr 30 16:45:46 -04 2022
I thought I'd join in on the lively *none *conversation with my two cents,
which is, perhaps, better than *none*. :)
*None* is an indefinite pronoun, so it can take either a singular or plural
verb.
Plenty of reputable resources are available to explain further:
https://www.thesaurus.com/e/grammar/none/
https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/none-or-none-are
https://www.writersdigest.com/write-better-fiction/is-none-singular-or-plural
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/grammar/british-grammar/no-none-and-none-of
Lisa
P.S. Bonus points go to those who noticed my example of when to use *which*
in my opening line.
On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 11:20 AM <visionlist-request at visionscience.com>
wrote:
> Send visionlist mailing list submissions to
> visionlist at visionscience.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>
> http://visionscience.com/mailman/listinfo/visionlist_visionscience.com
>
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> visionlist-request at visionscience.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> visionlist-owner at visionscience.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of visionlist digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: [cvnet] [External] Re: Abbreviations (Gislin Dagnelie)
> 2. Re: [cvnet] [External] Re: Abbreviations (Lewis, Terri)
> 3. Re: [cvnet] [External] Re: Abbreviations (Sedat Ozer)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 15:37:38 -0400
> From: "Gislin Dagnelie" <gislin at lions.med.jhu.edu>
> To: "Brian A. BARSKY" <barsky at berkeley.edu>
> Cc: "Lewis, Terri" <lewistl at mcmaster.ca>, "Todd, James"
> <todd.44 at osu.edu>, Gislin Dagnelie <gislin at lions.med.jhu.edu
> >,
> "cvnet at mail.ewind.com" <cvnet at mail.ewind.com>,
> "visionlist at visionscience.com" <visionlist at visionscience.com>
> Subject: Re: [visionlist] [cvnet] [External] Re: Abbreviations
> Message-ID: <626C3E82.32752.1B555562 at gislin.lions.med.jhu.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Actually, it's Dutch, where "geen" can be used with singular or plural,
> depending on context (as Dwayne pointed out for "none").
>
> I would think "personne" is not a good equivalent, since it is clearly
> singular. "Aucun" would be a better equivalent, but you're right, that
> too is
> used with the singular verb form: "Aucun n'a it..." rather than "aucun
> n'ont
> dit...."
>
> Gislin
> .
>
> On 29 Apr 2022 at 19:07, Brian A. BARSKY <barsky at berkeley.edu> wrote:
>
> Gislin, is your native language French? Note that "none" conjugates with
> the
> singular, not plural, in French (e.g., "personne ne donne" not "personne ne
> donnent").
>
> Brian
>
>
> > On Apr 29, 2022, at 11:40 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
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 20:21:12 +0000
> From: "Lewis, Terri" <lewistl at mcmaster.ca>
> To: "Horowitz, Todd (NIH/NCI) [E]" <todd.horowitz at nih.gov>
> Cc: CV Net <cvnet at mail.ewind.com>, Vision List
> <visionlist at visionscience.com>
> Subject: Re: [visionlist] [cvnet] [External] Re: Abbreviations
> Message-ID: <FA7EC4B7-261E-42C7-9DFF-DA3B93F6777D at mcmaster.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://visionscience.com/pipermail/visionlist_visionscience.com/attachments/20220429/dfcf5ca2/attachment.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 22:32:44 +0300
> From: Sedat Ozer <sedatist at gmail.com>
> To: gislin at jhu.edu
> Cc: "Lewis, Terri" <lewistl at mcmaster.ca>, "Todd, James"
> <todd.44 at osu.edu>, Gislin Dagnelie <gislin at lions.med.jhu.edu
> >,
> "cvnet at mail.ewind.com" <cvnet at mail.ewind.com>,
> "visionlist at visionscience.com" <visionlist at visionscience.com>
> Subject: Re: [visionlist] [cvnet] [External] Re: Abbreviations
> Message-ID:
> <
> CA+FfuzXBRewtOBirDZ7Qjhym0CM8fDaqGjAXECPufbL7c4LFwA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> It seems that language is not a purely logical process to consider, and
> there is not only one optimal solution (i.e., there is not only one optimal
> and proper way to communicate, as the grammar can change from one region to
> another). It has its own rules (which can also evolve over time). The good
> part: all of the discussed options can be understood. The editing problem
> of manuscripts (on the large scale) seems rather a personal choice of
> editors, reviewers etc.
>
> Sedat Ozer
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 9:57 PM 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
> >
>
>
> --
> Sedat Ozer, Ph.D.,
> www.SedatOzer.com
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://visionscience.com/pipermail/visionlist_visionscience.com/attachments/20220429/934b6251/attachment.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> visionlist mailing list
> visionlist at visionscience.com
> http://visionscience.com/mailman/listinfo/visionlist_visionscience.com
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of visionlist Digest, Vol 64, Issue 36
> ******************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://visionscience.com/pipermail/visionlist_visionscience.com/attachments/20220430/a76dbde3/attachment.html>
More information about the visionlist
mailing list