![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 29. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Tabitha on April 17, 2003, at 14:10:50
Bob, on PSB it says at the top of the page "There's a bunch of other boards here"
I'm no Beardedlady, but shouldn't that be "There are a bunch of other boards here" ?
Posted by IsoM on April 17, 2003, at 19:54:50
In reply to Grammatical error on PSB, posted by Tabitha on April 17, 2003, at 14:10:50
> >Bob, on PSB it says at the top of the page "There's a bunch of other boards here"
I'm no Beardedlady, but shouldn't that be "There are a bunch of other boards here" ?
- - - -
Nope - a bunch is singular, while the word "boards" is plural, a bunch means just that - "a" bunch or only one bunch hence "there is" is correct.
Posted by Jonathan on April 17, 2003, at 22:23:35
In reply to Re: Grammatical error on PSB » Tabitha, posted by IsoM on April 17, 2003, at 19:54:50
> Nope - a bunch is singular, while the word "boards" is plural, a bunch means just that - "a" bunch or only one bunch hence "there is" is correct.
That's exactly what I thought when I first read Tabitha's post: "there is a bunch of bananas; there are two bunches of bananas".
Then I gave more thought to the problem, and particularly to Tabitha's real motive for posting it (which is obviously to entice BeardedLady to return from her self-imposed exile: a motive which I strongly support because her erudition and defence of the English language made this bunch of boards a much better place). From that perspective, it immediately becomes clear that Tabitha's question cannot be as simple as it first appeared.
For example, suppose we simply replace the collective noun "bunch" with another collective noun, "number". "There is a number of other boards here" definitely sounds wrong to me, while "there are a number of other boards here" sounds okay. Why should replacing "bunch" with "number" make any difference, if it does? Is this the same grammatical phenomenon that causes the singular verb (flies) to become a plural verb (like) when we replace two nouns in the sentence "time flies like an arrow", transforming it into "fruit flies like a banana"?
Although "there is a number of other boards" sounds wrong, I think it would actually have been grammatically correct when the Social Board was created in August 2000: at that time the number of other boards was one, the original Psycho-Babble Board. Perhaps the sentence was written then and never updated when the six (or seven?) newer boards were added to the bunch?
There's also the intriguing question whether the mysterious Tele Board, which is not listed at the top of Social as one of the "bunch of other boards", belongs to a separate bunch of its own. If it does, there are (not "is") actually two bunches of other boards.
The only thing I'm sure about is that we need BeardedLady's grammatical genius.
Posted by Jonathan on April 17, 2003, at 22:30:05
In reply to BeardedLady's expertise desperately needed, please, posted by Jonathan on April 17, 2003, at 22:23:35
Dr. Bob's paper about this site (CyberPsychology & Behavior, 3(6), 935-950) has the title "The Best of Both Worlds" - http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/research.html
This raises another intriguing question about English grammar: "The Best of All Worlds" would certainly have been grammatical, but shouldn't one say "The Better ..." when there are only two worlds from which to choose?
For example, "Earth is the best of all worlds in the solar system, but Phobos is the better of both worlds which are satellites of the planet Mars, because the Phobics are social, and everyone knows that social phobics are kind, sensitive people"; "the best of all articles is 'the', but the better of both indefinite articles is 'an'".
"From lightest words sometimes the direst quarrel springs."
Cato the Elder (234-149 BCE),
who would have been Cato the Eldest if Cato the Younger had been twins
Posted by Tabitha on April 18, 2003, at 2:04:00
In reply to The Best (or The Better?) of Both Worlds?, posted by Jonathan on April 17, 2003, at 22:30:05
Hmm. the Better of Both Worlds sounds wrong, but if you replace Both with Two.. then you have
Better of Two Worlds (sound right)
Best of Two Worlds (sounds wrong)It's the same conundrum with "bunch" versus "number" of boards. When I read "bunch" I think "number". But if we were talking grapes, I'd think "bunch of grapes" not "number of grapes", unless they were already picked off the vine, then it would be a number of grapes. The boards seem like individuals to me, not a true "bunch".
IsoM is right though, technically "bunch" is singular.
Gee, where's an English teacher when you need one?
Posted by Hollygirl on April 18, 2003, at 10:25:09
In reply to Re: The Best (or The Better?) of Both Worlds?, posted by Tabitha on April 18, 2003, at 2:04:00
>
> Gee, where's an English teacher when you need one?
>I AM an English teacher and I am just as confused as the rest of you. Shhh...don't tell my students
Posted by ayuda on April 18, 2003, at 11:37:45
In reply to Re: The Best (or The Better?) of Both Worlds?, posted by Tabitha on April 18, 2003, at 2:04:00
> Hmm. the Better of Both Worlds sounds wrong, but if you replace Both with Two.. then you have
>
> Better of Two Worlds (sound right)
> Best of Two Worlds (sounds wrong)
>
> It's the same conundrum with "bunch" versus "number" of boards. When I read "bunch" I think "number". But if we were talking grapes, I'd think "bunch of grapes" not "number of grapes", unless they were already picked off the vine, then it would be a number of grapes. The boards seem like individuals to me, not a true "bunch".
>
> IsoM is right though, technically "bunch" is singular.
>
> Gee, where's an English teacher when you need one?
>I'm not an English teacher, but I am a History PhD student, which means I write A LOT, and we are VERY anal about grammar (among other things -- it helps to be a neurotic in this field). I have looked up "bunch," "best," and "better" in my American Heritage Dictionary.
"Bunch" is listed as a singular, not plural, term, for all of its usages. Thus, a singular verb would be in order when using bunch. However, I agree with those who say that "number" would be a better term, as it is not as colloquial as "bunch."
As for "better" and "best," "best" is listed as a "superlative of good," and a "superlative of well." "Better," however, is listed as a "comparitive of good," and a "comparitive of well," and there is the following usage hint:
"'Better' is normally used in a comparison of two: 'Which house of Congress has the better record?' However, best is used idiomatically with reference to two in certain locutions: 'Put your best foot forward.' 'May the best man win!' ... The use of 'better' for 'more,' as in 'the distance is better than a mile,' is considered unacceptable in writing by a majority of the Usage Panel [of the dictionary]."
I think that what stood out the most to me was the difference between a superlative and a comparitive. So now the grammarians can give us some insights on the difference between superlatives and comparitives.
Posted by wendy b. on April 18, 2003, at 22:50:15
In reply to Re: The Best (or The Better?) of Both Worlds?, posted by ayuda on April 18, 2003, at 11:37:45
Dear Grammarians:
Today's Lesson: Plural forms of nouns and their verbs ----
I have been a teacher of all sorts of people, of all ages. Presently, I teach in the public school system. I have taught writing and rhetoric to college students, and graded a ton of essay-type papers over the years. I now do some grant-writing and editing jobs part-time, when I'm not teaching.
I will only tackle the "There's a bunch of other boards here, too" conundrum, because, like Tabitha, that one has always stuck in my craw, and I'm glad it's finally being brought out into the open.
:-]The reason it should be: "There ARE a bunch of other boards..." is because the word "bunch" is standing in for the word "number," or "many," at least in terms of what the word connotes. What is meant is that there are several, so using the substitute - "There are several board here..." - is the way to figure out what kind of verb the noun takes. For example: "Many people ARE commenting on this..." It's relatively common for a word like bunch to take a plural verb.
Taken from a web site on grammar used by students at a community college in Hartford, CT:
______________"... the so called collective nouns, which are singular when we think of them as groups and plural when we think of the individuals acting within the whole (which happens sometimes, but not often).
audience
band
class
committee
crowd
dozen
family
flock
group
heap
herd
jury
kind
lot
[the] number
public
staff
teamThus, if we're talking about eggs, we could say "A dozen is probably not enough." But if we're talking partying with our friends, we could say, "A dozen are coming over this afternoon." The jury delivers its verdict. [But] The jury came in and took their seats. We could say the Tokyo String Quartet is one of the best string ensembles in the world, but we could say the Beatles were some of the most famous singers in history. Generally, band names and musical groups take singular or plural verbs depending on the form of their names: "The Mamas and the Papas were one of the best groups of the 70s" and "Metallica is my favorite band."
Note that "the number" is a singular collective noun. "The number of applicants is steadily increasing." "A number," on the other hand, is a plural form: "There are several students in the lobby. A number are here to see the president."
Collective nouns are count nouns which means they, themselves, can be pluralized: a university has several athletic teams and classes..." [end of quote]
_______________I especially like the example using the word "number," above, which helps explain why Dr Bob's choice of the verb "is," is incorrect.
However, Bob's use of the word "bunch" is fine; it may be colloquial when it's used in reference to people, but not to objects, as in "a bunch of flowers."
Now, it's too bad Beardy isn't here, but we still have a few hacks in the language business on this board...
:-]
Wendy
Posted by noa on April 19, 2003, at 6:46:28
In reply to Re: another teacher takes a turn, posted by wendy b. on April 18, 2003, at 22:50:15
Sheesh. It is a wonder that anyone can master this language! I feel for people learning it as adults!
Posted by wendy b. on April 19, 2003, at 8:08:01
In reply to Re: another teacher takes a turn, posted by noa on April 19, 2003, at 6:46:28
> Sheesh. It is a wonder that anyone can master this language! I feel for people learning it as adults!
Absolutely!!
I used to teach English as a Second Language to adult foreign speakers living in the U.S., and god, did they ever get frustrated. And after having picked up some improper forms when they first learned English in their own countries, they could almost never change; such is the relative level of plasticity of the adult human brain. Children pick up foreign languages with ease, as opposed to their parents. I would teach various members of the same family in many cases, and the adults would often marvel at the level of mastery their 7-year olds had attained, while they continued to struggle along.
There are so many exceptions to the "rules" of English grammar that my students couldn't really understand, nor could I explain. My advice was to read and converse in English as much as they could; it's only by using the language that one really gets the hang of it...
Speaking of idiomatic expressions (getting the hang of something), learning such phrases as "taking the bull by the horns," to be "under one's thumb," to be a "stick in the mud," or "take it with a grain of salt," was particularly difficult... The students would ask my WHY these expresisons meant what they did, and of course, some expressions mean the same thing from one language to another, but I would often have to say that there is no answer to the WHY question. I asked them to think of an idiom in their own language, one that I could tell them did not have the same meaning in its literal translation into English, and then ask them WHY that meant what it did in Spanish or German or Portuguese. That put an end to such questions! Language is a living, growing thing; it's interesting to be aware of its inconsistencies and surprises.
Anyway, getting far afield...
Thanks, Noa,
Wendy
Posted by beardedlady on April 19, 2003, at 12:51:06
In reply to Grammatical error on PSB, posted by Tabitha on April 17, 2003, at 14:10:50
Everyone:
There IS a bunch of boards. Bunch is the noun. "Of boards" is part of a prepositional phrase; we don't count it. If you mean, "There are other boards," say it; don't say bunch.
Yes, the "better" of both worlds.
Wendy, I'm not picking on you. Everyone knows you are quite the literary whiz and genius on world events and many other topics. But I wanted to point out that "presently" means "soon," so you are "currently" a teacher. In the olden days, I'd have let you know via e-mail. So I hope you don't take offense at my mentioning it here. : )>
Shar, bless you for your many posts above.
And Jonathan, are you married? If so, do you fool around?
Thanks for thinking of me. I'm enjoying the sunshine and a nice Atkins-induced weight loss, as well as lots of time away from the icky internet, where people practice the rules of civility in unusual--and uncivil--ways.
weirded beardo : )>
Posted by beardedlady on April 19, 2003, at 13:00:39
In reply to Re: The Best (or The Better?) of Both Worlds?, posted by ayuda on April 18, 2003, at 11:37:45
> I think that what stood out the most to me was the difference between a superlative and a comparitive. So now the grammarians can give us some insights on the difference between superlatives and comparitives.
Hiya, Hon:
I think (not sure) that comparitives are for two items. If you only have one sister, she can't be the oldest or youngest sister; she can only be the older or younger. That's comparitive.
Superlatives deal with three or more levels; almost all end in est (the superlative suffix).
That's about all I know on this subject. Oh, except you can only use the word "between" when you are speaking of two objects or people: between you and me. And you use "among" when there are more people: she was the prettiest among us.
Oh, and because "different" is a comparitive, not a superlative, you say "different from," not "different than."
O.K. I'm truly finished with my PBA posts for a long, long time. See you at Jay's, where the spyware lurks!
weirded beardo : )>
Posted by beardedlady on April 19, 2003, at 13:49:57
In reply to O.K. Once more with feeling. » ayuda, posted by beardedlady on April 19, 2003, at 13:00:39
> Everyone:
>
> There IS a bunch of boards.I should have said hello, first! Hi. I hope you are all happy and healthy!
> Oh, and because "different" is a comparitive, not a superlative, you say "different from," not "different than."
Untrue. Different is not a comparative; "better" is. That's why something is "better than" but not "better from." Different goes beyond comparitive. It's too different to compare. One thing can't be more different than another.
O.K. I am truly finished now.
Take care, everyone!
weirdy : )>
Posted by Dinah on April 20, 2003, at 9:22:28
In reply to all right, already! , posted by beardedlady on April 19, 2003, at 12:51:06
Posted by medlib on April 20, 2003, at 9:58:36
In reply to corrections, posted by beardedlady on April 19, 2003, at 13:49:57
Hi y'all--
I've done a fair amount of editing and proofreading over the years. And having long ago passed both "uppity" and "obnoxious" in the minds of most, I'll risk butting into this learned discourse.
1) There are no "comparitives", only "comparatives". (And, yes, I know that current correct punctuation requires commas and periods be placed inside quotation marks. I refuse to do so because it was once incorrect and still looks wrong to me.)
2) There is still some controversy about when, and whether, to treat collective nouns as singular or plural. I vote with Tabitha and Wendy on this one. I was taught that collective nouns regarded as plural usually are preceded by the article "a/n"; those regarded as singlular are preceded by the article "the". (Objects of prepositional phrases referring to collective nouns are always plural and not relevant here). The distinction is made, as Wendy stated, on the sense, or context meaning, in which the collective noun is used. So, it's possible for the same collective noun to be plural in one sentence and singular in another. All this would make "There're a bunch of other boards..." the correct phrasing.
Since I learned these things in olden days, before "progress" apparently rendered correct grammar and spelling irelevant to writing, I checked with my first alma mater on current usage. (I know of no other institution so ...er, obsessive about trivialities and irrelevancies. I wonder if they're still trying to catalog the Internet?)
Since my son informed me that unsolicited advice or correction is *not* supportive, I try to focus on message content and let others point out writing errors. I just think of all such mistakes as typos or ADD generated. In that spirit, I concluded that Dr. Bob's phrase in question must have been an attempt to be colloquial--which he managed about as well as I do humor. And, because it's been at least 2 years since I've read an error-free book (I read 3-4/week), it seems unreasonable to hold PB to higher standards. Are proofreaders now an extinct species?
Now, back to what I pretend is real life.---medlib
Posted by Dinah on April 20, 2003, at 10:31:45
In reply to Corrections to corrections-- Beardy and Wendy, posted by medlib on April 20, 2003, at 9:58:36
And I thought I knew my grammar rules (even though I feel free to ignore them).
I obviously need to brush up.
Posted by beardedlady on April 20, 2003, at 11:34:27
In reply to Corrections to corrections-- Beardy and Wendy, posted by medlib on April 20, 2003, at 9:58:36
> 1) There are no "comparitives", only "comparatives". (And, yes, I know that current correct punctuation requires commas and periods be placed inside quotation marks. I refuse to do so because it was once incorrect and still looks wrong to me.)
Whoops. Got me there.
> 2) There is still some controversy about when, and whether, to treat collective nouns as singular or plural.
There's not, actually. At least there hasn't been in my circles. The collective noun usually refers to words like committee. As in the following:
The committee vote Tuesday.
The committee votes Tuesday.There's no controversy about what comes after a preposition. "Of boards" is not the subject. Bunch is one (like group, number, collection, etc.), as in one bunch of grapes. As far as I can remember, it's always been just one.
> Since my son informed me that unsolicited advice or correction is *not* supportive, I try to focus on message content and let others point out writing errors.Actually, someone asked, which is why I answered. I hope you didn't find it unsupportive, as I didn't find yours unsupportive.
> Now, back to what I pretend is real life.---medlib
Well, this is what is real life for me. I teach graduate and undergraduate writing at a local university. It's my job to tell my students that BMWs doesn't have an apostrophe when it's a plural.I haven't read an error-free book, either, but it doesn't mean I wouldn't like to read one!
Have a great day, and thanks for the spelling heads up.
beardy : )>
Posted by beardedlady on April 20, 2003, at 11:53:51
In reply to Corrections to corrections-- Beardy and Wendy, posted by medlib on April 20, 2003, at 9:58:36
I concede.
I do believe it's wrong to say, "There are a bunch of boards," but it sounds terrible to say, "There is a bunch of boards."
I wouldn't have said either. I would have said, "Peruse our many lovely boards, which offer something of interest to everyone. And thank you for flying Babble Air."
It's wrong to say, "Everyone loves their jobs," but it's ugly to say, "Everyone loves his job." So I skip it and say, "All love their jobs."
So here's what happened, how my revelation came this Easter Sunday to me: I went outside in my two-piece (egad!) bathing suit, plopped my fat behind on a chaise longue (I believe that's the French way to spell it), and said, "Why, this is so ridiculous!"
Real life, indeed. Who gives a fart? I mean really.
So thanks for pointing out the errors of my inflexible thinking ways.
Only trouble is: I pulled a Gabbi (by posting twice--just so there's no misunderstanding as to what I mean by this). So not only was I wrong, but I was wrong twice.
I'm totally gone now. It's sunny, and I shouldn't be babble-ing. Evermore.
weirded beardo : )>
retired and getting ready to love it
(and swearing I'm not going to peek back here)
Posted by leeran on April 20, 2003, at 12:06:23
In reply to Re: Nice to see you too. :) And thanks. , posted by Dinah on April 20, 2003, at 10:31:45
"And I thought I knew my grammar rules (even though I feel free to ignore them)"
Me, too! Until I followed the "bunch" of posts here.
I had a double major in English and Journalism but I was an unknown A.D.D. student back in sixth grade when Mrs. Puttcamp spent endless hours diagramming (note, Merriam-Webster gives two spellings for that word, one "m" and with two "m's") sentences.
I felt like prostrating myself when I read Wendy B's and Beardedlady's posts. I've heard A.D.D. jokingly referred to as having a "drain" versus a brain. I guess a lot of this useful information went down the drain somewhere between first grade and yesterday.
Posted by Dinah on April 20, 2003, at 13:26:03
In reply to Re: I thought I knew mine, too (not) » Dinah, posted by leeran on April 20, 2003, at 12:06:23
Let's see. Mine were a pair of ninth grade teachers affectionately known as... Well, never mind. Apparently one of them couldn't torture us sufficiently so they used two.
But I prefer to ignore those rules as often as possible, because most rules are very hard for me to ignore. Ignoring grammar rules is my form of wild rebellion. :)
Whooooeeeeeee!!!!!
(Although that doesn't stop my husband and me from having a lot of fun with grammar mistakes on the news and in printed materials that cause the meaning of the content to be far different from that intended. Grammar humour is great!)
Posted by medlib on April 20, 2003, at 13:49:43
In reply to I TAKE IT BACK! You are totally correct. » medlib, posted by beardedlady on April 20, 2003, at 11:53:51
Hi again--
Sorry, I should have cited my source. Here's what my beleaguered U. has to say on the subject (though it was still an Institute when I attended):
http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~opa/pubs/ed_style_guide/grammar.html
Sorry, too, that my statement about "returning to what I pretend is real life" was unnecessarily obscure. These days, the only remotely productive things I do are babysit for my grandson and teach an occasional Internet class--a far cry from the normal lives the rest of you live. So, I end up "Pretending to be normal". or, in my case, pretending to *have* a life. In any case, quibbling about sentence structure on the Internet is a whole lot more fun than cleaning up the kitchen, which is what awaits me in what passes for my real life.
Happy Easter!---medlib
Posted by Oddipus Rex on April 20, 2003, at 15:09:45
In reply to Addendum, posted by medlib on April 20, 2003, at 13:49:43
the correct term is a babblation of boards
a bunch of boards = incorrect for the same reason a comittee of bananas=incorrect> Hi again--
>
> Sorry, I should have cited my source. Here's what my beleaguered U. has to say on the subject (though it was still an Institute when I attended):
>
> http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~opa/pubs/ed_style_guide/grammar.html
>
> Sorry, too, that my statement about "returning to what I pretend is real life" was unnecessarily obscure. These days, the only remotely productive things I do are babysit for my grandson and teach an occasional Internet class--a far cry from the normal lives the rest of you live. So, I end up "Pretending to be normal". or, in my case, pretending to *have* a life. In any case, quibbling about sentence structure on the Internet is a whole lot more fun than cleaning up the kitchen, which is what awaits me in what passes for my real life.
>
> Happy Easter!---medlib
Posted by Oddipus Rex on April 20, 2003, at 15:21:13
In reply to My opinion, posted by Oddipus Rex on April 20, 2003, at 15:09:45
)but I probably should have tried harder since I thought I'd better come back and announce it so somebody wouldn't have to try and explain to me why a bunch of boards is acceptable(
> the correct term is a babblation of boards
> a bunch of boards = incorrect for the same reason a comittee of bananas=incorrect
>
>
>
> > Hi again--
> >
> > Sorry, I should have cited my source. Here's what my beleaguered U. has to say on the subject (though it was still an Institute when I attended):
> >
> > http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~opa/pubs/ed_style_guide/grammar.html
> >
> > Sorry, too, that my statement about "returning to what I pretend is real life" was unnecessarily obscure. These days, the only remotely productive things I do are babysit for my grandson and teach an occasional Internet class--a far cry from the normal lives the rest of you live. So, I end up "Pretending to be normal". or, in my case, pretending to *have* a life. In any case, quibbling about sentence structure on the Internet is a whole lot more fun than cleaning up the kitchen, which is what awaits me in what passes for my real life.
> >
> > Happy Easter!---medlib
>
>
Posted by Oddipus Rex on April 20, 2003, at 16:44:08
In reply to I was just trying to be funny, posted by Oddipus Rex on April 20, 2003, at 15:21:13
Least your in good company Wendy!
And Thanks To Everyone everywher
Main Entry: pres·ent·ly
Pronunciation: 'pre-z&nt-lE
Function: adverb
Date: 14th century
1 a archaic : at once b : before long : without undue delay
2 : at the present time : NOW
usage Both senses 1b and 2 are flourishing in current English, but many commentators have objected to sense 2. Since this sense has been in continuous use since the 15th century, it is not clear why it is objectionable. Perhaps a note in the Oxford English Dictionary (1909) that the sense has been obsolete since the 17th century in literary English is to blame, but the note goes on to observe that the sense is in regular use in most English dialects. The last citation in that dictionary is from a 1901 Leeds newspaper, written in Standard English. Sense 2 is most common in contexts relating to business and politics <the fastest-rising welfare cost is Medicaid, presently paid by the states and cities -- William Safire>
Posted by wendy b. on April 20, 2003, at 20:27:29
In reply to William Safire talking incorrect? Oh my!, posted by Oddipus Rex on April 20, 2003, at 16:44:08
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.