Janet,
    The first "it" stands in for Nike, so it can't also function as a 
simple placeholder. Compounding requires parallelism. The missing 
(implied) "It' gets processed as pronoun and then fails to work.
You can easily say "I chose the brand Nike because it is a popular brand 
and can be  found at a number of sites." You can easily say "I chose the 
brand Nike because it is a popular brand and wasn't going to be hard to 
find." Or "I chose the brand Nike because it is a popular brand and 
finding sites that sell it wouldn't be hard."
     I hope that makes some sense.

Craig

On 10/28/2010 12:28 PM, Castilleja, Janet wrote:
> I have a question.  I work with many ESL students.  I teach them ( or
> try to) about dummy 'it' and 'there.'  But, I also teach them that a
> verb can be compound:  Joe ran to the store and bought milk. (This isn't
> the way I actually view this, but we are so short on time I don't want
> to get into ellipted clauses).  Recently, a student wrote this one a
> paper:
>
> I chose the brand Nike because it's a popular brand and wasn't going to
> be hard to find sites that sell Nike.
>
> It seems as though logically the first 'it' should be able to function
> as the subject of the second dependent clause, but it doesn't.  Is it
> the linking verb that is driving this?  But I can say this:
>
> He was a thinker but wasn't a doer.
>
> What is going on here?
>
> Janet
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Craig Hancock
> Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 8:59 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Question about expletive "there"
>
> Herb,
>      I think we have the same functional motivation behind extraposition
> with infinitives.We have  "It is easy to love watermelon" (where
> "watermelon" is the new information) and "watermelon is easy to love"
> where "love" is prime (new) focus. The first might be an answer to "tell
>
> me about things that are easy to love." The second might be a response
> to "tell me about watermelons."
>
>
> Craig
>
> On 10/28/2010 11:32 AM, Stahlke, Herbert F.W. wrote:
>> Let me add a functional reason for the syntactic behavior Bob lays
> out.  Initial position in a sentence is typically topic position.
> Topics are things already known or referred to, and for that reason they
> will be definite.  If a pronoun is used, that pronoun will usually have
> definite reference.  While indefinite subjects are by no means
> impossible in English, indefinites are typically new information, and we
> generally put new information later in a sentence, hence the shift of
> the indefinite subject to after the verb.  The subject position is now
> empty, and, English not liking null subjects, we insert "there" as a
> syntactic subject, subject to all of the behavior Bob describes below.
> In text and in speech, existential sentences overwhelmingly have
> indefinite noun phrases after the linking verb.
>> Herb
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Robert Yates
>> Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 11:14 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Question about expletive "there"
>>
>> John,
>>
>> Let me offer a formalist answer to your question.
>>
>> There in both of your examples is clearly in the subject position.  I
> base this claim on the nature of tag questions.
>> 1)  Throckmorton is married, isn't he?
>>
>> In tag questions, the pronoun that is repeated in the tag question has
> as its antecedent the subject of the main clause.
>> So, consider the tag questions in your two examples.
>>
>> 2) There never was, was there?   [was is not negated because of the
> never and no context was necessary to figure out the tag question]
>> 3) There was a life here then, wasn't there?
>>
>> If the extraposition analysis is correct, and (3) is really (4).
>>
>> 4) A life was here then.
>>
>> The tag question for (4) is
>>
>> 5) A life was here then, wasn't it.
>>
>> If that is the case and "a life" is the subject, then the tag question
> for 3 really should be:
>> 6) *There was a life here then, wasn't it?
>>
>> And, (6) is clearly ungrammatical.
>>
>> The extraposition analysis requires a very separate explanation for
> tag questions of sentences with the existential there analysis; the
> there is the subject position doesn't.
>> By the way, the there as subject position provides an explanation to
> the following.
>> We know that standard English says the agreement of the verb should be
> based on the following following noun phrase.  So, (7) is non-standard
> and (8) is standard.
>> 7) There is a lot of reasons for this.
>> 8) There are a lot of reasons for this.
>>
>> Many native speakers say (7) because "a lot of reasons" is not in the
> canonical subject position.
>> And, let's consider conjoined noun phrases in this construction.
>>
>> 9) A book and a pencil are in the table.
>>
>> In the existential there construction, I think most of us would find
> 10 decidedly odd and prefer 11.
>> 10) ?There are a book and a pencil on the table.
>> 11)  There is a book and a pencil on the table.
>>
>> On the other hand, this agreement principle is very much influenced by
> a proximity rule.  12 is not so odd.
>> 12) There are two books and a pencil on the table.
>>
>> This proximity rule does not come into play for sentences like (9)
>>
>> 13) A book and two pencils are on the table.
>> 14) Two pencils and a book are on the table.
>>
>> If the extraposition analysis is correct,  the sensitivity of
> proximity determining agreement should not exist.
>> ***
>> Finally, unlike most languages of the world, English, French, German,
> and a few other languages of the world do not allow null forms in tensed
> clauses.  It is for this reason that (7) is ungrammatical in English,
> but not in Spanish or Russian or Chinese or Japanese or most languages
> of the world.
>> (15)  *is raining.
>>
>> Bob Yates, University of Central MIssouri
>>
>>
>>>>> Craig Hancock<[log in to unmask]>   10/28/10 7:57 AM>>>
>> John,
>>        My own perspective on your second example would be that "there"
> is not the subject of the sentence, but is a place holder for the
> extraposed subject, which shows up on the right (other) side of the
> verb. You could unravel it to "A life was here then.:
>>        It's hard to explain your first example outside of context.
> Example (I'm guessing). "Was there ever a good reason to marry her?"
> "There never was." In this instance "A good reason to marry her" would
> be the understood subject.
>>       For some reason, we don't like to say things like "raining is,"
> so we say "It is raining." I think "there" (in these instances) is
> functioning in the same way. A sentence can be called existential when
> you are asserting the existence of something. Your second sentence does
> a little more than that with "here" and "then" as modifiers.
>>        I look forward to other views.
>>
>> Craig
>>
>> On 10/27/2010 8:36 PM, John Chorazy wrote:
>>> Hello to all...
>>>
>>> Please share some wisdom on the use of "there" as an expletive
>>> expression taking the dummy role/position as subject (not an adverb)
>>> in the following models taken from Sam Shepard's /True West. /My
>>> understanding is that the expletive "there" must be the subject of a
>>> verb of existence, which happens here in the past tense, to be the
>>> subject of a sentence... it's not in the locative, if I'm correct.
>>> Thank you!
>>>
>>> "There never was."
>>>
>>> "There was a life here then."
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> John Chorazy
>>> English III Academy, Honors, and Academic Pequannock Township High
>>> School
>>>
>>> Nulla dies sine linea.
>>>
>>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
>>> interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and
> select
>>> "Join or leave the list"
>>>
>>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>>
>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface at:
>>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>
>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>
>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface at:
>>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>
>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>
>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface at:
>>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
>> and select "Join or leave the list"
>>
>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>>
>>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface at:
>       http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
>       http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
>

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/