This is so unusual that I have to respond, but I find myself
agreeing with Brad. “Accounts receivable” is one of those formulaic
constructions we have in English, some borrowed from French, like “courts
martial,” “lobster Newburg,” “steak tartar,” and also “attorneys-at-law” and “brothers-in-law.”
Of course, those with phrasal modifiers, like the last two, have the order they’d
normally have in English.
Herb
From: Assembly for the
Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brad
Johnston
Sent: 2009-04-02 10:37
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Lester's text in the classroom (was: Phrasal Verb Overview)
one of the things that
constantly causes problems for anyone trying to teach the material (“You said
only nouns could be plural, but in ‘accounts receivable,’ the adjective is”).
Bill: this is incorrect. The noun is "account"
and more than one are "accounts". The descriptive adjective is
"receivable", often in standard accounting referred to
as "receivables", which is then a noun. The accounts are
"receivable accounts" but in the parlance of the trade, they are
"accounts receivable". I wonder if that makes it clearer or less
so. In any event, in "accounts receivable", "accounts"
is the noun. Just clearing the
files and noticed this. .brad.02apr09.
The
book is so good in other respects that I’ve continued to use it, using
handouts to deal with the form/function distinction. But, of course, then the
students get annoyed because I’m disagreeing with the textbook, and I get
annoyed with them because the last thing future teachers should do is view a
textbook (or their instructor’s comments!) as Holy Writ. Sincerely, Bill
Spruiell From: Assembly for the
Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
John Dews-Alexander Greetings,
ATEGers! Someone
(I believe it was Herb) recently suggested a book to me: Mark Lester's (1990)
Grammar in the Classroom. I'm not sure why I haven't discovered this
book before, but I quite like it and would suggest it to anyone reviewing
grammar texts. Even if you can't use it in your classroom, you and/or
your students might enjoy knowing about it as a reference text. I
find Lester's writing to be straightforward and uncluttered. Has
anyone actually used this as a classroom text for teachers-in-training? If
so, I'd be interested to hear about your experiences. I
went to the text specifically to find some more information on phrasal verbs,
information that wasn't overly technical for non-linguistic students but also
not overly simplified so as to ignore descriptive facts. I thought I'd share
here a few of the main points about phrasal verbs that Lester includes.
John turned out the light. (Noun subject+phrasal verb+noun phrase object)
John turned at the light. (Noun subject+verb+adverbial prepositional phrase)
Say
the sentences out loud and notice the stress. In phrasal verbs the
preposition is stressed while it is not in the PP.
Hope
all the grammar nerds enjoy this as much as I did! Regards, John
Alexander Austin,
Texas 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/