Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Post History

60%
+1 −0
Q&A Primary clause uses singular, subordinate co-reference is plural, what verb to use in English?

The general rule I learned is to ignore subordinate clauses when resolving cases like this. The "outer" sentence, which contains the verb, is "The oath he swore (verb) just fluff to him", and so t...

posted 4y ago by Moshi‭  ·  edited 4y ago by Moshi‭

Answer
#2: Post edited by user avatar Moshi‭ · 2020-09-21T19:04:43Z (about 4 years ago)
Updated for Monica's clarification
  • > The general rule I learned is to ignore subordinate clauses when resolving cases like this. The "outer" sentence, which contains the verb, is "The oath he swore (verb) just fluff to him", and so the correct verb is "was".
  • That is correct, "was" is the grammatically correct choice in your example sentence. Basically, you should be able to delete the nonrestrictive clause and the sentence should remain grammatically correct.
  • > My question is: does English grammar have any rules about verb number in such phrases (including, possibly, "don't do it because you cannot win")?
  • I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. "Don't do it" is a simple imperative sentence. "because you cannot win" is a subordinate clause.
  • ---
  • > But the subordinate clause uses a plural (the "words" that make up the oath), so it looks funny to write "was" immediately after.
  • >
  • > I am aware that I can rewrite the sentence to avoid this problem. My question isn't about how to write it.
  • Even though your question isn't about it, I'll answer it anyway. Grammatically correct does not always mean natural. That's why many writers suggest that you read your work out loud and rework awkward sentences. If it sounds off to you, you should rewrite it to sound more natural rather than worrying about grammar.
  • > The general rule I learned is to ignore subordinate clauses when resolving cases like this. The "outer" sentence, which contains the verb, is "The oath he swore (verb) just fluff to him", and so the correct verb is "was".
  • That is correct, "was" is the grammatically correct choice in your example sentence. Basically, you should be able to delete the nonrestrictive clause and the sentence should remain grammatically correct.
  • > My question is: does English grammar have any rules about verb number in such phrases (including, possibly, "don't do it because you cannot win")?
  • While some might recommend not creating this sort of construction, there's no actual grammar rule against having differing plurality between the primary and subordinate clauses. It just probably won't sound natural.
  • ---
  • > But the subordinate clause uses a plural (the "words" that make up the oath), so it looks funny to write "was" immediately after.
  • >
  • > I am aware that I can rewrite the sentence to avoid this problem. My question isn't about how to write it.
  • Even though your question isn't about it, I'll answer it anyway. Grammatically correct does not always mean natural. That's why many writers suggest that you read your work out loud and rework awkward sentences. If it sounds off to you, you should rewrite it to sound more natural rather than worrying about grammar.
#1: Initial revision by user avatar Moshi‭ · 2020-09-21T18:18:10Z (about 4 years ago)
> The general rule I learned is to ignore subordinate clauses when resolving cases like this. The "outer" sentence, which contains the verb, is "The oath he swore (verb) just fluff to him", and so the correct verb is "was".

That is correct, "was" is the grammatically correct choice in your example sentence. Basically, you should be able to delete the nonrestrictive clause and the sentence should remain grammatically correct.

> My question is: does English grammar have any rules about verb number in such phrases (including, possibly, "don't do it because you cannot win")?

I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. "Don't do it" is a simple imperative sentence. "because you cannot win" is a subordinate clause.

---

>  But the subordinate clause uses a plural (the "words" that make up the oath), so it looks funny to write "was" immediately after.
>
> I am aware that I can rewrite the sentence to avoid this problem. My question isn't about how to write it. 

Even though your question isn't about it, I'll answer it anyway. Grammatically correct does not always mean natural. That's why many writers suggest that you read your work out loud and rework awkward sentences. If it sounds off to you, you should rewrite it to sound more natural rather than worrying about grammar.