Herb:

Thank you! You are very nice to me.

Eduard 


On Tue, 28 Feb 2006, Herbert F.W. Stahlke wrote...

>Thanks, Ed.  We just need a little time to socialize this newcomer.
>
>Herb
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar on behalf of 
Edward =
>Vavra
>Sent: Tue 2/28/2006 4:43 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: "work for" plus adverb clause
>=20
>Herb,
>    I admire your patience.
>Ed
>
>>>> [log in to unmask] 2/28/2006 4:08:12 PM >>>
>
>Eduard,
>
>Let me try this again. =20
>
>"Grammatical" has at least two widely accepted meanings.  In
>linguistics
>it's concept used to distinguish between sentences a native speaker
>would recognized as possible in the native language and those that he
>or
>she would not so recognize.  By this common linguistic usage, your
>first
>sentence is clearly ungrammatical.  You may not like this definition,
>but it is one of some linguistic importance and considerable utility.
>
>The second sense refers to judgments people make as to what seems to
>them to be appropriate usage in formal standard English.  Having
>taught
>English for most of my life at this point, I have learned that these
>judgments vary considerably, based on age, region, experience with
>editing and correcting, and simply personal preference.  And very
>often
>these judgments are made with little sensitivity to context.
>
>Here's an example that some educated speakers of English, including
>colleagues and students in my English department, have told me is
>ungrammatical because the use of "it" in it is redundant.
>
>Hillary simply hates it that she's not considered a liberal.
>
>Now, one may also say
>
>Hillary simply hates that she's not considered a liberal.
>
>The difference is that the extraposed structure (with "it"), a term
>introduced, I believe, by Otto Jespersen to describe this sort of
>construction, is used when the speaker/writer wishes to emphasize the
>newness or contrastiveness of the that-clause. =20
>
>I don't know how you would judge these two sentences, but clearly
>there
>are skilled editors and language teachers who would come down on
>either
>side, as I have found with my colleagues.
>
>There are contexts, perhaps, where the "for" of the example we've 
been
>discussing would feel redundant, in which case I too would encourage 
a
>student writer to remove it, but I would be delighted if my student
>had
>a sufficiently subtle sense of language to tell the difference and to
>know when it WOULD be appropriate to use it.
>
>In short, I would not consider the presence or absence of "for" in
>that
>sentence to be a matter of grammaticality but rather a matter of
>appropriateness to context.  Redundancy is a bit too coarse a measure
>for choices like this.
>
>Herb
>
>
>
>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/