|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
An orbit is when one object in the universe (for example a planet or a star) goes round another one without touching it.
Is this an idiom? Something about it bothers me. Is it an ellipsis for "an orbit is created when......"? Is there a better way to say it?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
I think I'd write it more like: An orbit consists of one object in the universe (for example a planet or a star) going round another one without touching it.
Scratch that. An orbit is the path one object in the universe (for example a planet or a star) follows as it goes round another one without touching it.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 247
enthusiast
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 247 |
Is there a better way to say it? Thoreau didn't think so: "Our truest life is when we are in dreams awake."
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661 |
... goes round...
I'd say 'goes around', but.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
Dear Wordminstrel: Glad to see you posting again. I like the Thoreau quote, no problem. The thing that jars me is " A thing is when".
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296 |
Commentary on adjectivals that answer the question, "When did something happen?" (or..."When will it happen," etc.)
Example: "Our trip is in the summer."
"In the summer" here is a prepositional phrase functioning as a adjective modifiying "trip." It's a phrase that indicates time (or: 'when').
In the sentence you quote, wwh, there's a more complex construction. There is an adjective clause that is introduced by the adverb 'when'--and that's completely legal. We might expect subordinate clauses beginning with 'when' to modify a verb, as in:
"Joe moved against the wall when the crowd entered."
In the above, the clause clearly functions as an adverb modifying 'moved.'
In the sentence you posted, the subordinate clause simply functions as a predicate adjective that modifies 'orbit.' Adjective clauses can begin with 'when,' although we probably hear a lot more adverb clauses beginning with 'when.'
Romance is when you're living in a dream world.
Edit: wwh: You make a good point. I want to add that I don't especially like the sentence you pasted, but I think it's grammatical.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296 |
I just want to add one more observation about adjectivals: In some writings about grammar, you will read that adjectival clause markers are: who whom which that where ...but that classic list is incomplete. When reading about descriptive grammar, you'll find mentioning of 'when' as an adjectival clause marker, too, among other subordinate candidates.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 10,542 Likes: 1
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 10,542 Likes: 1 |
I think similar objections have been posed, for fifty years at least, regarding "That's why..." Something to do with predicate adverb issues and the verb "to be", as I recall. The preferred (read "correct") construction was "The reason is that..."
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803 |
"The reason is that..."
Or either that or "The reason is…", one.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296 |
The problem with prescriptive grammar is it doesn't always reflect the grammar as it's generally spoken. Although in very formal writing prescriptive grammar would be the better choice, I don't think it should always be the end. For example, if I said, "That's why we shouldn't go!" and, if I am generally and easily understood to be speaking a grammatical sentence, then that construction is acceptable.
I wouldn't have any problem with a speaker in a formal situation developing an argument, and pointedly ending it with the construction: "That is why we should not ________________." Now, had it been a formal argument in writing, I'd lean toward "The reason is _________________."
I don't mean to imply that simply because we can describe a grammatical construction, it is therefore acceptable in all situations. I do mean that when constructions are generally used and understood by most of the population, those constructions are acceptable in formal speech and even to some degree in formal writing. For example, consider the split infinitive. I don't think too many people worry these days about splitting it in formal writing as long as the split doesn't sound awkward and, in fact, facilitates the reading of the sentence.
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,333
Members9,182
|
Most Online3,341 Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
0 members (),
743
guests, and
1
robot. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|