|
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 15
stranger
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 15 |
Received in an email today:
"The wages of sin is death. Repent before payday."
I'm having trouble with the subject/verb agreement in the first sentence, but I can't quite put my finger on how to correct it. Philosophical issues aside, can anyone offer a grammatically correct alternative?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 742
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 742 |
The following from M-W seems to fit:
Main Entry:wage
Function:noun
Etymology:Middle English, pledge, wage, from Old North French, of Germanic origin; akin to Gothic wadi pledge— more at WED
Date:14th century
1 a : a payment usually of money for labor or services usually according to contract and on an hourly, daily, or piecework basis — often used in plural b plural : the share of the national product attributable to labor as a factor in production
2 : RECOMPENSE, REWARD — usually used in plural but sing. or plural in constr. *the wages of sin is death— Rom 6:23 (Revised Standard Version)*
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,204
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,204 |
Not sure that either M-W or you, sjm, are on very stablke grounds, using the quasi-Jacobean English of the RSV as your benchmark for English Grammar.
I take your point, Verlangen (welcome, btw - glad to see you here) - it is not good modern grammar at all. The only real way out is to put "wages" into the singular. One does talk of one's "wage", if not so often as ones "wages", whereas to say that they "are death" contradicts the undoubted singularity of that event (well - I hope so, anyway!! - unless you are someone who "dies a thousand deaths" when something embarrasses you.)
But I suppose that the real point (and the saving of both sjm and M-W) is that it is an epigram that is definitely hallowed - both from its source (Saint Paul, no less) and from long usage. One accepts, therefore, the apparent grammatical inconsistency on the grounds of custom and practice.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
using the quasi-Jacobean English of the RSV as your benchmark for English Grammar.
I'd say you had a good innings, there, Rhuby old chap.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,204
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,204 |
Well - they won't allow me any outings until there's a nurse spare to push my bath-chair. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,692
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,692 |
Following an obvious line of thought, I had a look at the verb "to wage" as in to wage war. There is according to the OED an etymological connection with the noun being discussed and also a link to a use of the word wager that I had not encountered previously: "wager of battle". Meaning an ancient form of trial by combat between the parties or their champions; I'm aware of the practise (Arthur's knights were always at it), but haven't come across that expression.
The links with payment for work are shown as being through medieval English and French, but seem quite obscure to me. Can anyone please help with a better explanation?
dxb.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,819
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,819 |
The wages of sin is death, but after taxes all that's left is a sleepy feeling.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 742
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 742 |
>Not sure that either M-W or you, sjm, are on very stablke grounds, using the quasi-Jacobean English of the RSV as your benchmark for English Grammar.
[faldagery]AHEM! Please note that my post made no assertions as to the accuracy or validity of the M-W quote. I simply said "it seems to fit", referring to its relevance to the topic under discussion.[/faldagery]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 872
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 872 |
RHUB WROTE: ---> One accepts, therefore, the apparent grammatical inconsistency on the grounds of custom and practice
... or meaning.
Grammatical Ground Rule # 1. Sec. 1. Page 1.
(like Moses wrote it on the wall.)
RULE ONE:
All rules of grammar are subservient to meaning.
(Wages of sin) one entity (= is) (death) one entity.
Post edit: Oh yeah, I forgot, there's this...
I Got drunk and blew my hard earned wages.
I got drunk and blew my hard earned pay.
In both cases what he blew was his hard earned singular.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,204
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 2,204 |
I Got drunk and blew my hard earned wages.
I got drunk and blew my hard earned pay.
In both cases what he blew was his hard earned singular.
It's rather grey area, I s'pose. A lot depends on whether you consider that there is an actual difference between "wage" and "wages."
I'm rather inclined to think that the plural form refers to the fact that they are a regular payment over a period, e.g.,
"The wages for this job are £200 per week."
as opposed to a reference to one week's pay, which could be couched as,
"My wage was right down to £180 this week."
However, I will agree that I have often heard the plural form used in the second instance.
As to grammar being subservient to meaning, I would only agree to that in cases where the use of "bad" rather than "good" grammar enhances the meaning.
I could never condone the use of bad grammar just because its use doesn't affect the meaning.
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,334
Members9,182
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
729
guests, and
2
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
