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/