Well that’s not really the same; he’s saying that as a linguist, it is important to do something. The universe or whatever undeclared force has decided that it is important.
He’s not saying he decided it is important, it just is. (Even if it’s not.)
???
But he is not talking about what he finds important in his capacity as a linguist. He is talking about what is important for all linguists in general.
There are now five native speakers that say it is fine, and one non-native speaker that disagrees.
I also do not know why I said he. I’m a bit tired, y’know?
My comment was to 3kingdoms. I agree with SolYViento.
I understand that, roan and SolYViento. I also understand that it happens a lot in spoken English.
These are the things that we got tested a lot in school and university entrance exams.
From another thread (“of my sister” or “of my sister’s”), an Italian member wrote "Well, it seems that all the grammar rules I learned at school are hardly ever respected… " Perhaps this will help you understand where I am coming from.
I understand. You’re saying you are ignorantly obstinate.
As the person who wrote this sentence, and reviewed it many times, and had an editor proof-read the book, it seems to me that I have a right and obligation to state my views on this discussion. It is important that I do so.
As a non-native speaker, I would never presume to question the “correctness” of usage of any language pattern that is accepted as normal by a majority of native speakers.
The reason is that language usage is subtle and constantly evolving. Words are put together in a variety of ways to convey meaning, and in fact words are often left out, or unnecessary words are added, and previous rules are broken, and these things all become the standard patterns of a language. This evolving usage is then described in grammar books. The grammar books themselves have to evolve to match the evolving usage patterns.
A grammar rule, or interpretation of a grammar rule, is of less importance to me than the actual usage patterns of a language. The native speakers are the masters of the usage of a language, not the non-native grammatical nitpicker.
No one tried to nitpick you. Some one posed a question and I agreed with his impression or instinct, from a grammatical point of view. That is all.
Someone.
Nothing personal, I just consider this kind of discussion to be nitpicking. Usage, the common usage of the native speaker, rules, in my view.
I personally prefer to say “whom did you see”, but I know that a majority of people today say “who did you see”. I regularly put prepositions at the end of sentences, but I know that there is a rule that says that a preposition is not something we should end a sentence with. I do not like to use contractions in writing but many people do. All of the above patterns are accepted and commonly used today.
The initial question was about style in writing.
Thank you, guys, for your input. I have learnt a lot from the disscussion (didn’t expect it turned out to be so flammable).
@ alex
Great shot. It was a feast.
Thanks daw for drawing my attention to the video posted by Alex, a feast indeed!
I am not a fan of grammar and I am no good at English grammar. But I am interested to know how modern people break traditional grammar rules.
@3kingdoms: do you have a reference of the grammar rules that says the questioned sentence is incorrect? Thanks.
I’d be interested to know as well. I do find grammar quite interesting, and have read various books on the subject of English grammar, and I cannot for the life of me think of any rule is broken by
this common phrasing.
The only conclusion that I keep coming back to is that 3kingdoms does not appreciate that ‘as a linguist’ has two possible interpretations, depending on context.
That “appreciation” is covered in my very first comment in this thread, in the second half of it.
Please put this to rest!
If you imagined “Speaking” in front of ‘as a linguist’, then it would become immediately clear that the sentence is correct.
(for those who does not want to continue with this thread, please simply ignore this post and all future posts)
I think I understand what 3kingdoms is getting at. If you want to use the construct “As a , <blah…blah…blah>”, then should be the subject of the sentence (or partial sentence) <blah…blah…blah>. Otherwise, we are not using the construct correctly. It seems to make logical sense to me. I just wonder if there is a formal (or old) grammar rule for this. I am not surprise if there is one.
The original question asked “Is it sounds right in writing?” We have to be aware that writing usually takes a more formal style than speaking. Hearing native speakers saying something does not mean it is correct in writing.
In addition, some professional writers are often judged by their use of grammar and vocabulary. They have to pay careful attention in these areas.
Quite often a phrase becomes widely accepted but not to the point of being accepted grammatically. I see a lot of “10 items or less” signs nowadays. But if I were a professional writer, I would write “10 items or fewer”, just in case some readers get upset.
One thing I learned as a language leaner is that asking a native speakers about grammar is futile. This applies to all languages and not just English.
Galina did not explicitly ask if the original sentence was grammatically correct, but it was implied by her last comment “Sorry, I can not express it in grammar terms”. So, thanks 3kingdoms for point this out. I would have never noticed it otherwise.
Like I said earlier, I am not a fan of grammar and I am no good at English grammar.
Here are my own grammatical mistakes (which I usually considered as ‘typos’):
“for those who does not” → “for those who do not”
“I am not surprise…” → “I am not surprised…”
I believe staying humble is better off for learning languages in the long run. This applies to both native speakers and learners.
Edwin ,
It is interesting that you have trouble with the third person singular. Lots of people have trouble with this in English although the rule is very simple. The third person singular is the only person where the ending is different, yet people struggle. To me this just confirms that rules are not always that helpful. Your brain just fights the illogical nature of this rule. Either you and others will eventually stop making this mistake or the language will change and allow “he don’t”
As to the issue at hand, the issue is known as a “dangling modifier”. It is usually taught that the modifier, in this case the phrase “as a linguist” should be followed as soon as possible by the word being modified. This is largely a matter of style, as daw says. The concern is that if the modifier is dangling there can be some ambiguity.
“As a child, my brother was my closest friend.”
Who was the child, me or my brother?
I could have written " It is important, as a linguist, that you …" but instead I wrote “As a linguist, it is important…” You could argue that this is a dangling modifier, but there is no ambiguity.
No one will think that “it” is the linguist. The next possible “linguist” or person is “you” in the sentence. I could also have written " As a linguist, you need to …" in order to avoid any possible dangling modifier, and the meaning would have been similar, but not the same, since “you need” is stronger than “it is important”. I did not want the word “need” but rather the word “important”, so I wrote it the way I did (I guess since I cannot remember).
We often place certain words at the head of a sentence for emphasis. “Gone are the days” “Strange are the ways of men”
I really recommend watching the video that Alex posted on this subject.
One last point on possible ambiguity. This sentence is taken from a specific context. The full context also reduces any ambiguity. If we just look at this sentence in isolation we may not even know what the word “linguist” means in this context. However, anyone who is reading the book knows that if refers to the first meaning in the Oxford English Dictionary, that is " a person skilled in foreign languages."
Steve, I was just typing my post without carefully proof-reading it. So I consider all my errors ‘typos’.
I believe one reason English becomes a universal language is that it is extremely versatile. I imagine if this thread is about a French phrase, it would have only one reply:
“C’est une faute! Ne le dites pas et ne l’écrivez pas non plus! Jamais!”