Hi, Anton! Recently you wrote in a message to Ardith Hinton:
AS> I should fear to hear it -- what if the inheritance
AS> turns out to have another magickal item?
AH> Nah. Just a few ordinary household items made of xxx,
AH> yyy, and zzz... none with magic(k)al powers, but all
AH> of which we are still using. :-)
AS> Then I won't pursue this quotidian matter any futher.
AS> But may I make so bold as to question the grammar in
AS> the quoted sentence?
Of course. You may be sure that whatever I say in the E_T echo has
been edited & proofread thoroughly; however, I do miss things sometimes. :-)
AS> 1. Is it correct to use "but.. which" without a prior
AS> occurence of "which" in the sentence?
If I hadn't thought so, I wouldn't have done it. Perhaps it is an
error... or perhaps it's one of those stunts one shouldn't try at home. :-))
I could have written "... none of which has [blah blah] but all of
which we are still using." Although it would have made a nicer parallelism I
felt it might be unnecessarily wordy.
IIRC I've seen a few constructions like "... most, but by no means
all, of which [i.e. covid-related deaths in this country] are associated with
long term care facilities". In such cases the logic is more obvious.... :-)
AS> 2. Is it correct to express the continued use of these
AS> items in the present progressive tense?
As a native speaker I depend heavily on my Russian modem buddies &
foreign language textbooks to identify the names of verb tenses. It seems to
me, however, that this tense is appropriate in situations where the action is
ongoing. I could have typed, in a separate sentence, "None of them has [blah
blah]... but all of them are still in use." IMHO the original sounds better.
AS> This distinction causes me serious doubts in my own
AS> writing, but in your case I should without
AS> vaccilation say: "and we still use all of them."
In general the present tense would work too, but in this example I
figure it would change the emphasis as well as the rhythm I had in mind. :-)
>>> In a moment, his wife looked up at him and said, "I'm
>>> sorry. I'd not thought she was capable of a thing like
>>> that."
AS> Mark the last sentece, which, again, is uttered by an
AS> apparently educted person.
It strikes me as unusual, but not incorrect. If the person you're
referring to lives in the Southern States I'd cut her a bit of slack.... :-)
AS> How about this:
AS> a. I forgot he was vegetarian. (he still is)
That's what I'd probably say.
AS> b. I forgot he had been vegetarian. (he has reverted)
If I knew he'd reverted but my brain slipped a cog, I might say "I
forgot he'd been vegetarian as an impecunious student but modified his stance
after he began doing hard physical work in the construction industry.... :-)
--- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+
* Origin: Wits' End, Vancouver CANADA (1:153/716)
|