ENGL300-1: Hannah Varga
ENGL300-2: Blake Harris
Due by class time on: Monday, Aug. 29th, 2011 at class time
The responses by the whole class are due by class time on: Wed., Aug. 31st, 2011
The text you need to read is here (just read the ONE page that is displayed; don't buy the article!). Please be aware that the text constitutes Sylvia Chalker's PERSONAL opinion about the fix grammar rule that WHO IS ALWAYS SINGULAR. She has good reasons why this doesn't seem fair, and lists a couple of plausible examples, but that does not give her the power to change existing rules! You can talk about your own feelings about fairness, too (but you don't have the power to change this rule, either ;-))
_______________________________________________________
by Emilie Russell, for 5 pts. extra credit:
In the artical "Is WHO Always Singular?" Sylvia Chalker shares her personal opinion on Geoffrey Leech's viewpoint on singular and plural verbs. Geoffrey says that who takes a singular verb even when a plural answer could be given. He believes that it MUST be singular but Sylvia Chalker disagrees. In this article, Sylvia used the dictionary as a reference when stating that the definition of who defines it as being used as a singular OR plural verb depending on the situation. It says that "you" can either be plural or singular depending on how its used as well. Even I myself, a native speaker, find that the plural verb seems more natural is frequently used sentences. I use sentences like, "Who are coming to the party?" or "Who have the leading roles in the film?" or "Who are going to work together on homework?". I don't realize how often I use the plural form because it only seems natural. Technically is it grammatically incorrect but it has become so normal in everyday language that it has become slang. Due to this, I would have to agree with Sylvia Chalker.
_______________________________________________________
In Sylvia Chalker’s article, “Is WHO Really Singular?” she gives examples of when it is acceptable to use “who in a plural form. She agrees generally with Doctor Leech that who is singular, but disagrees with him saying that it has to be singular. Doctor Leech states when “who” is used with plural verb that it is grammatically incorrect. Chalker believes that “who” is neither grammatically singular nor plural, but can be used with either type of verb. She begins to give examples of when “who” can be used with a plural verb. Chalker believes if trying to give a plural answer it is acceptable to use plural verbs with “who.”
I have never really stopped to think whether or not “who” is always singular. Usually, when I speak, I say things like, “Who is coming?” instead of “Who are coming?” However, I also say things like, “Who are they?”…I guess it really doesn’t matter what I say, because I am not the source of grammatical regulations, but after looking at Chalker’s article, it is interesting to take notice of the patterns of speech that I use.
ReplyDeleteChalker makes several good observations in her article and eventually concludes that (depending on the situation) “you” can be either singular or plural. This is different than the standard thought that “you” is always singular; Dr. Leech supports the “’you’ is singular” argument. I agree with Chalker, that “you” can be both plural and singular depending on the situation. Chalker does a good job of bringing different situations of “you” into this article and even sites the dictionary. As long as the dictionary defines “you” as both singular and plural, “you” should be used in both ways.
The article of Is Who Really Singular vaguely describes scenarios in which who can represent both singular & plural situations. After reading the article repetitively, the conclusion can be made that not each and every time will the phrase who serve only as singular. Though this is true; the more common and proper term of whom should be implicated in times where deemed necessary. Using who for each situation is improper. Whom is solely used to define objects, while who is used to define subjects. Through knowing this, it becomes easier to understand in which circumstances which word properly fits.
ReplyDeleteIs Who Really Singular is an article written by Sylvia Chalker about the singular and plural use of the word who. Chalker claims that opposed to what Geoffrey Leech thinks who can and often times should be used in a plural context to ask questions. To me that makes sense, if the answer to a question is plural then why would it be wrong for the question to be plural as well? Chalker is able to back up her opinion with many examples of the plural use of who. At first some examples do sound somewhat off but that is only because we are used to who being used in the singular. I think a lot of her examples sound perfectly fine and I will not hold back next time I ask "who are coming to the party?" I see more of Chalkers side because I base my language more off of context than semantics which is what she states about who. She says that depending on the context we are sometimes "forced" to use who in the plural. I like the way she used the word forced to describe this, because it is true that many times we are just forced to use it and it comes out naturally, without thought. Although who is considered to be most appropriate in the singular Chalker shows us that it sometimes can and must be used in the plural.
ReplyDeleteThe article, Is Who Really Singular, is an article talking about if it is correct to use who when talking about more than one person, or is it a grammar mistake. I believe that who is plural and singular given the defination states that who is a person or persons. Given that defination I believe that Sylvia Chalker is correct in saying that who can be used for both plural and singular sentences.
ReplyDeleteIn the article, Is Who Really Singular, Sylvia Chalker makes a really good argument. She argues that who when used in the form of a question sometimes requires a plural answer. Therefor, who would not always be singular. She gives some really solid examples to back up her argument. By the end of the article she had me convinced that in some cases who can be plural and doesn't always have to be singular. =)
ReplyDelete'Is WHO really singular?' is an article written by Sylvia Chalker. It is based on exactly what the title states. She starts the article by discussing Professor Geoffrey Leech's point on who being singular. While she agrees with part of what he says, she disagrees as well, stating: "But I feel he goes too far in continuing that this who is not entirely normally singular but must be singular, and that therefore such questions as 'Who are coming to the party?'are ungrammatical. She goes on to say how the context in which who is used can only be used in a plural reference. Later in the article she also discusses the relationship between noun groups and verbs and what makes who plural. While this is all based on Sylvia's opinion, she makes some really good points throughout the article itself.
ReplyDeleteThis article by Sylvia Chalker brings up some good points. I had never really consider whether or not "who" is singular or plural. Chalker, best convinced me of her opinion with the definition she cited in her article, but some of her examples did not sit well with me. I would never say, "Who are coming to the party?" Other than this one example, I pretty well agree with Sylvia Chalker.
ReplyDeleteThe article, Is Who Really Singular, is an article by Sylvia Chalker in contrast to a language analysis done by a man named Geoffrey Leech. Leech points out that the word "who" as the subject of a sentence is and should always be singular even if the verb of the sentence is plural. He states that anything following the verb that is plural is grammatically incorrect. However, Chalker states that the usage of the word depends upon the whether the verb is plural or not. She believes that if the action following the singular subject "who" is plural, that it is then necessary and grammatically correct to use plural verbs. This article confused me, because this subject was never brought to my attention throughout my educational career. I personally believe that using a plural verb to follow behind a singular subject is grammatically incorrect.
ReplyDeleteSylvia Chalker's article "Is WHO always singular?" brings up an interesting point. I have never given much thought to this idea. I agree, however, that is the dictionary states that who can be used as both plural and singular, then that is the way it should be used.
ReplyDeleteThis article, written by Sylvia Chalker, discusses whether or not the world who is singular or plural. She says that despite the fact that Dr. Leech says the word who always has to be singular, she believes it is not a concrete rule. She goes on to give examples of how the word who used in a plural sense. After reading this article I myself am convinced that the word who does not only pertain when dealing with singular subjects.
ReplyDeleteIn Sylvia Chalker's article "Is WHO really singular?" She raises the argument that the way we have been using who is not always correct. I have never really questioned the way we use who in everyday grammar. I think that she is right in some cases, but at the same time I do not think that what she says some things, will ever sound right. Even if it is grammatically correct. So maybe its a good thing she cannot change the way grammar is currently.
ReplyDeleteThe article "Is Who Always Singular", written by Sylvia Chalker argues whether the word "who" is singular or plural. The title well describes the bulk of the essay. The article is about Chalker disagreeing with Dr. Leech. She starts off by saying she agrees with the majority of what the professor is saying but claims "went too far" when he describes when "who"always has to be singular when followed by a verb. Chalker believes the the word "who" can be used as plural when it is used to ask a question. Personally I would agree more with Leech. As we learned in class who is a subject and whom is an object. A group of people is more of an object and is not singular. It may seem unnatural to and I probably will almost never say it, but in this context I believe the correct word would be whom.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSylvia Chalker's article "Is WHO always singular?" makes thought provoking points. She explains her stand on using the word WHO singularly and plural. She believes that because the dictionary says that who can be singular or plural it should be used either way. She raises an argument that says the way we have been using WHO has not always been correct.I don’t agree with her opinion, although she makes valid claims. While asking WHO questions can yield an answer that is plural
ReplyDeleteEX: 1:Whos dog is it?
2: it’s their dog
I don’t think it’s best to make the word itself plural. WHO is singular according to grammar rules. It can be used to describe plural subjects but I believe the word is singular.
The article”Who is really singular?” is very insightful. What this article is discussing is how the word WHO can be used in context. Sylvia Chalker doesn’t agree with Geoffrey Leech’s allegation that who must be used as singular. In the International dictionary the dictionary reads that it can be used as person or persons(plural). The author proves her point very well with a lot of detail and facts. I also agree with her because I use the word WHO similarly to how she does in her examples. I have been using the word WHO in plural and singular context for as long as I can remember even though I don’t use it exactly like she does. Overall I feel that this is a good article with plenty of evidence to back up the claims.
ReplyDelete"Is Who Always Singular", is an article that discusses whether or not the word "who" can be used as both singular and plural. I found it difficult to understand and had to re-read it to make sure I knew what Chalker and Leech were talking about. They both used several examples to back up their points on the matter. I never really thought about it, but I suppose it can be used in both forms. However, I think we are so accustomed to hearing in a plural context, that using it as singular just sounds wrong.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading “Is WHO really singular?” by Sylvia Chalker, I came to the conclusion that she has a valid point, even though it’s common to write and speak in Dr. Leech’s view. Dr. Leech stated that “who” is always singular while Sylvia Chalker states that who is not always singular, but that it can sometime be plural. When thinking about my own vocabulary, I will ask a friend “Who is going?” when I know and expect the answer to be plural. If we want the answer to be plural, why are we asking it in a singular manner? I have phrased these sentences singular my whole life without realizing exactly how I am saying/writing it. The one example that changed my mind was when Chalker said “Who are playing Macbeth and Banquo?” if you phrased it singular you are alluding to the fact that it’s played by one person.
ReplyDeleteIn the article "Is Who Always Singular," written by Sylvia Chalker, Chalker makes a valid point in that "who" can be used in both occasions, singular and plural. She states the dictionary says that who can be used both singular and plural so why not use it either way. She gives the reader numerous examples as to both ways you can use the word "who" and all her examples are relevant to case in point that both singular and plural are correct in using the word "who." Even though the reader might be accustomed to hearing the word "who" in plural form rather than singular, i.e. "Who are you?". The reader may also be accustomed to hearing the word "who" used in this form; "Who is coming to dinner." All in all, I agree with the point Chalker is trying to bring across.
ReplyDeleteMy first impression of Sylvia Chalker's article is that it is somewhat difficult to comprehend. I suppose that is so because the proposed phrases such as, "Who are coming?" seemed unfamiliar to me since I have always stated it as, "Who is coming?". Prior to reading the article, I would say that my stance on the issue lies more in line with Dr. Leech's. However, I feel that Chalker does make a compelling argument. Although she does make sense of certain instances where "Who" could be used in plural form, I do not believe that the article will change the way in which I usually use "Who", which is in singular form in mind.
ReplyDeleteUpon review of the article, "Is Who Really Singular", written by Sylvia Chalker, I find the article itself states that "it would be fairer to say that both singular and plural verbs are acceptable." Therefore, I conclude that depending upon the grammatical context and semantics, there are occasions when a plural rather than a singular is appropriate.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this article, I read it again; and again and again. Sylvia Chalker lost me on her key point. At first the phrase "Who were" sounded grammatically incorrect but eventually it sounded correct. All in all I learned that "who" can be singular or plural if the word ends in was or were.
ReplyDeleteI had read the article and I find that who is acceptable in both plural and singular forms. It just depends on what the content of the sentence states. I never really thought about this rule before. I usually just use who in the way that sounds correct.
ReplyDeleteWhen first reading the article "Is WHO Really Singular?," the example sentences using 'who' in the plural form almost sounded incorrect. I don't believe I've ever spoke consciously using 'who' in it's plural form because it feels unnatural to me. The author of this article, Sylvia Chalker, argues against Dr. Leech who claims that 'who' is always and only singular. Chalker uses various examples to prove that 'who' can be structured both singularly and plurally. By saying "who are going to work together on this project," you are seeking the names of multiple people to answer the question. Even by rearranging the question into a statement it makes much more sense. For example, "who are working together on this project" becomes "they are working together on this project." I fully agree with Chalker that 'who' can be both plural and singular, depending on the form in which it is needed.
ReplyDeleteThe Article "Who is Always Singular" written By Sylvia Chalker argues about who ,being singular and plural. She also was saying how plural verbs are being used and singular verbs. Plural can be used to mark ,if the plural answer is required. Chalker had mentioned that in the text as well. I never had an problem with using who as singular ad plural. But i understand the concept Stalker presented in the article.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading “Is WHO really singular?” by Sylvia Chalker, I realized that I have never thought whether or not “who” is always singular. When speaking, I generally say phrases such as, “Who is coming?” instead of “Who are coming?” However, I realize that I also say, “Who are they?" After reading Chalker’s article, it is interesting how she notices these types of patterns in the English language--ones that I even say frequently. Furthermore, Chalker's observation in her article concludes that (depending on the situation) “who” can be not only singular, but plural as well. In conclusion, I believe that there really are situations when the plural form is more appropriate than the singular form.
ReplyDeleteThe article "Who is Always Singular" by Sylvia Chalker talks about the word who and weather it can be used in sigular or plural form. I myself use the word who in both contents and have never had problem but I will look into the concept more.
ReplyDeleteThis article titled, "Who is Always Singular" by Sylvia Chalker is just a personal opinion of Sylvia's on why she thinks its odd that a "who" is always singular. She comes up with some very good examples that would make sense for "who" to be plural. She gives many examples as to why it is confusing that "who" would be singular. After reading this article I had no clue how often I use "who" in the plural form even though it isn't grammatically correct. I see why Sylvia would disagree with "who" always being singular.
ReplyDeleteSylvia Chalker has presented a very astute observation in her article "Is WHO really singular?" She proposes that the who-is-singular rule cannot apply to all sentence structures. I was thrown off a bit as I realized that such a rule exists simply because it is very common in the English language to use who in a plural sense. Very rarely will you hear someone ask "who are coming?" Chalker states that in some instances the use of who as a plural seems more natural when speaking, but there are also certain situations when the plural form is forced to apply. "Who were fighting among themselves" is a good example of when a sentence demands a pluralized who. This article simply states that sometimes there are exceptions to the rules.
ReplyDeleteThis article is written as an opinion by Slyvia Chalker. Her argument is that while it is assumed that who is always singular that may not be the case. She provides several situations into where who could be plural such as "Who are coming?" rather than who is. I can say I have never heard anyone ever say that, nor use who in a plural sense, but then again few people use who/whom correctly either.
ReplyDeleteIn this article Sylvia Chalker makes a very valid point. I had never really thought about whether or not 'who' is always singular. She uses great examples and does a wonderful job of explaining her argument. After giving much thought I do believe that who can be both plural and singular. It all just depends on the context of the sentence and the answer to the question being asked.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this article, I think that who can be either singular or plural. It's kind of confusing to figure out where to use who as a plural because to say, "who are coming?" sounds so wrong. But if you pair who with an obvious plural noun like people, "who are the people coming?" the sentence sounds right. even though i believe that who can be either plural or singular, it makes it less confusing to pair it with a plural noun when you want to be clear that it is plural.
ReplyDeleteby Drewandria Burnside:
ReplyDeleteThe article, Is Who Really Singular, is an article by Sylvia Chalker in contrast to a language analysis done by a man named Geoffrey Leech. Leech points out that the word "who" as the subject of a sentence is and should always be singular even if the verb of the sentence is plural. He states that anything following the verb that is plural is grammatically incorrect. However, Chalker states that the usage of the word depends upon the whether the verb is plural or not. She believes that if the action following the singular subject "who" is plural, that it is then necessary and grammatically correct to use plural verbs. This article confused me, because this subject was never brought to my attention throughout my educational career. I personally believe that using a plural verb to follow behind a singular subject is grammatically incorrect.
The article by Sylvia Chalker made some interesting points of who being both singular and plural. I never really took this problem into account. After reading this I believe it was a solid argument and who can be either singular or plural. It mainly just depends on the sentence structure.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Sylvia Chalker makes a good point about if "who" is actually singular. I had never thought of it myself on that matter because that is how I speak and was taught that it was correct. Such as, "Who is coming over tonight?" "Who is that?" But I've also heard it for plural as well, "Who are they?" Who make the best couple?" I do not agree with Geoffrey Leech that "who" is simply singular, it is just that it sounds grammatically correct when it is placed with a singular verb rather than a plural verb.
ReplyDeleteThe article "Is Who Really Singular?" by Sylvia Chalker is interesting. I have never seen or read the word "who" in a plural tense. I believe she does make a good argument, her argument being that when referring to a question the word "Who" can have a plural answer. There are many cases where I find myself using "who" in a plural sense but I was unaware of the fact that the singular word "who", when used in a question, can have a plural responds. I feel that it is fine to say "who are they?" and "who are those people?" but things like "Who are coming" sounds, grammatically incorrect to me. With that I honestly have to agree with Geoffrey Leech. I believe that it is okay for "who" to have a plural responds and but I believe the word "Who" is a special case, singular word.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the author that who does not always need to be singular but it could be used as either singular or plural. I believe that the best example of this is indeed the fact way that who is used in question form such as who is coming with, this question can be asked if one singular person was coming with or if many people were coming with and it would make sense.
ReplyDeleteSylvia Chalker makes a compelling argument in Is Who Really Singular, against who always being singular. Chalker gives many examples when who is used as plural. This article just reassured me as the English language being extremely complicated and having loopholes to every rule. This article made me think about when I use who in conversations and I never think about it, I usually just say what flows and there are times when I use who in the plural form.
ReplyDeleteThis article is written as an opinion by Slyvia Chalker. He discusses whether or not the word who is plural or singular.This depends on the context of the sentence or the type of question that is being asked.Personally I didn't know that depending on the context who could be either plural or singular.
ReplyDeleteThis article talks about how there are some instances in which using who in the plural case is needed. This is an opinion piece by Slyvia Chalker. The context of the sentence or the type of question that is being proposed. Personally, I believe that who can be plural depending on the sentence, but overall, who is more commonly singular.
ReplyDeleteThis is a question that I have never thought of before. I think Chalker brings up a good point that 'who' is not to be used as a singular, as Leech argues. I have to admit that using who with plural verbs makes me a little bit uneasy, as it sounds clunky and awkward at times to my own ear. I have to side with Leech that 'who' implies singularity. Admittedly, this is just my own aesthetic judgment, so it's nothing more than a matter of opinion. It might be perfectly acceptable to use 'who' with plural verbs.
ReplyDeleteThis question always seems to run across my mind, "Is who singular"? This articled really clarified things for me. Along with the assignments in class I have clear understanding.
ReplyDeleteOne of the first things I thought of after reading this was Jeopardy. "Who is Benjamin Franklin?" or "Who are the Brady's?" But I never really stopped to think whether Who was plural or singular. Simply I believe most people would say that Who is singular but when you think about the way we use who at times, it can make it seem plural. For example, "Who are they?" The who is referring to more than one person so logically that would appear to make Who both singular and plural, seeing as how most of us don't think about how we say who. I would tend to agree with the author that Who is neither singular or plural.
ReplyDeleteThe Article explains how who can who can be either singular or plural. When pertaining to more than one person is still the same. The word who when used as a plural, sounds awkward. Whose, with it is also singular and plural. Any sub word of who can be either singular or plural. Who, seems to be more singular. Example, who did their homework? The answer, he did his homework. Who sounds naturally singular but it can be plural. Whose books are these? Can be singular and or plural because it is up to whom is the subject. I believe that who is either singular or plural.
ReplyDeleteMost people like Geoffrey Leech's are convinced that "Who" is singular. Silvia Chalker argues the contrary and says that "who" can be both either a plural or singular form. She claims that it depends on the situation that word is being used. Also, she uses the dictionary to prove her statement. The question is "Who is right"?
ReplyDelete