You wrote:
> Consider this sentence:
>
> 1-These beliefs go hand in hand with a rejection of social reform as
> either feasible or desirable.
>
> Does this mean that social reform is rejected because it is considered to
> be either unfeasible or undesirable? Or is it considered to be both
> unfeasible and undesirable?
>
Either means “either”; both means “both.” If you want to say that reforms are both, it would be best to say both. However, since the sentence is basically negative (the beliefs “reject” social reform), it would be understood by most that it could be both feasible and undesirable. But it would still be best to say “both feasible and desirable.”
> Would a comma before “either” change anything?
>
> 2-These beliefs go hand in hand with a rejection of social reform, as
> either feasible or desirable.
>
There is no reason for a comma here. “As” is a conjunction or preposition, but in either case there is no reason to have a comma since the clause (if you consider it elliptical) or phrase modify “reform.” At any rate, it is adverbial or adjectival, so neither is a noun. The only reason you would have a comma here would be for an appositive, which is a noun, noun phrase, or noun clause.
Dear A D:
>
> You wrote:
> a. Freud uses unconscious drives to explain our behaviour.
> b. Marx bases his vision of history on class struggle.
> c. Heisengberg employs subatomic mechanisms to explain the strange
> phenomena we observe.
>
> Are the above sentences logical? Freud doesn’t use unconscious drives, but
> “the idea of unconscious drives”; Marx bases his theories on “the concept
> of class struggle” and Heisenberg employs “the idea or a theory of
> subatomic mechanisms”. Can the words “the concept of…” etc. be
> considered to be implied by the sentences?
>
> Instead of the first sentence can one say: Freud uses the idea of
> unconscious driveS to explain our behaviour?
>
You point is well taken. In conversation and in context, listeners would probably understand what you meant. However, a and c should be made clearer if written. B is probably OK as it is because of the word “vision,” so we understand that we are talking about a theory or idea.
You wrote:
> Are these sentences correct:
> 1-Those two men John and Harry are friends of mine.
> 2-These two books “War and Peace” and “Anna Karenina” are Tolstoy’s best
> novels.
>
They are grammatically correct but the appositives need to be set off by commas or dashes. Because the subjects use demonstrative adjectives, the dashes would make the meaning clearer to the reader.
> Hi,
>
> Is “White” male correct? Or “white” male?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Linda
Normally “white” is merely a color, so it would not be capitalized. This is the same with “black,” “brown,” “yellow,” or “red.” Occasionally, you may see any of these used as a racial name and it would be capitalized, but the writer is usually trying to make a point. In virtually all cases it is unnecessary.
Clearly, if the modifier were based on a country, language group, or geographical location, then it would be capitalized: e.g., Caucasian male, African-American male, Hispanic male, etc.
You wrote:
> Please help defuse an ongoing grammar war.
> ——————————————-
> “Did she know where the Concierge desk was located?”
> Shouldn’t it be:
> “Did she know where the Concierge desk is located?”
> ==============================
> It is past tense when referring to the person ‘she’ granted, but
> the concierge desk IS located somewhere. I think if you say
> WAS located it would mean that the concierge desk was located in a place
> that it is NO longer located.
>
> PLEASE HELP. THANX.
>
This is one war that honestly is not worth fighting. Both sides are fine.
Sentence #1 is typical whenever a person is telling a story. Standard style is to keep things in the same tense unless there is a good reason not to.
Sentence #2 is OK, especially in a context where the concierge desk is a current topic of discussion.
If you wanted to indicate that the concierge desk had been moved and is longer in the place where it once was, you would say, “Did she know where the concierge desk had been located?” The past perfect tense indicates something that has been done or completed prior to the past action being described (“did know”).
You wrote:
> Please end an argument I have with a friend.
>
> “No military leader would say that it is not difficult”
>
> Is this a double negative???
>
> Thank you
>
No, it is not. The two negatives modify two different words: “leader” and “difficult.” It is only a double negative if they modify the same word or one negative modifies another negative.
This style is commonly used for understatement. You could say “Any military leader would say that it is difficult,” but it does not have same understated effect.
I hope you can help settle an argument that my friend and I are having.
When describing a pen, my friend believes that calling it a writing utensil is correct, while I believe that the term writing implement would be more appropriate.
Which should be used in this context?
Thanks,
R
Without meaning to sound wishy-washy, either would work. The term “writing implement” is more commonly used. However, both words mean “tool,” so either would be fine. When you examine the roots, “implement” literally means “something which helps to complete”; “utensil” literally means “something meant to be used.” In the spirit of the holidays, it is not worth arguing over.
You wrote:
> Is this the proper use of the word that?
>
> A typical noir plot revolves around a female character THAT hires
> a detective.
>
In this sentence with two possible antecedents (“plot” and “character”) “who” would be more precise. “That” normally refers to people only as groups or types. Usually it refers to things. See “That/Which/Who” in Grammar Slammer or https://www.englishplus.com/grammar/00000255.htm.
You wrote:
> Which is correct?
>
> “A hotel” or “An hotel”
>
> “A hedgehog” or “An hedgehog”
>
> I would be most grateful for your advice.
>
> Kind regards
>
>DA
>
This depends a lot on local pronunciation. There are a few words that can go either way–“historical” is probably the most common example. In most dialects of English, one would say “a hotel” or “a hedgehog”; in most writing you would find that standard. The “H” is pronounced. However, some dialects in English do drop the “H” in pronunciation and would be inclined to say “an hedgehog” or sometimes even “an hotel.” If you were showing this in dialogue, you might spell it “an ‘edgehog” or “an ‘otel” with the apostrophe to show that the “H” is not pronounced. In the case of “hotel” like
“historical” the word comes from the French Norman which did not pronounce the “H” and with some of that still influencing the pronunciation of English in England, you might be more likely to hear “an hotel” in England than in
North America. (The Norman aristocrats were less likely emigrate…)
You wrote:
> A-Is this sentence grammatically correct:
>
> 1-The work WOULD take three weeks if we START on Monday.
>
> Some people tell me it is, and some tell me it isn’t. If it is not
> grammatically correct, is it a commonly used ungrammatical structure?
This is fine. “If” clauses are one of the most common reasons for using conditional verbs in English.
>
> B-What is the difference between:
> 2-He would help you if you asked him.
> and:
> 3-He WOULD help you if you WOULD ask him.
#2 is a simple statement of fact–when you ask him, he helps. #3 is a problem of will–he helps when people ask, but you are so far unwilling to ask.
“Would” originally was the past tense of “will” in the sense of “desire.” It still suggests that in uses like this.
>
> Does 3 mean that your asking him is unlikely because you are unwilling to
> ask him?
>
Exactly.
Book Reviews and Observations on the English Language