| QUESTION |
Dear Grammar,
What tense does one use in English for the minutes of a meeting? In German, one always has to use the present tense (Mr X says, Ms Y replies, the meeting ends at 4 p.m., etc.)
Thank you in advance for your help.
|
| SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE |
Ditzingen, Germany  Friday, August 14, 1998
|
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
I'm afraid I don't have Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (or an out-of-date copy, for that matter), so I can't answer your question with any authority. I've never seen minutes written entirely in the present tense. ![[E-Mail Icon]](../gif/email.gif) Any minutes I've ever seen have been written in the past tense, recording something that happened. I'll leave an e-mail icon here in case someone else has a more authoritative answer to share with us.
|
| QUESTION |
My teacher told me that in the sentence:
I took the wire, string, and tools by Aunt Sally's house.
Should the by be to, or could it remain as by?
Thanks
|
| SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE |
| Oroville, California Friday, August 14, 1998
|
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
| You're undoubtedly better off using to in that sentence, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that by is wrong. The online Merriam-Webster's defines by as an adverb meaning at or to another's home, as in "He stopped by yesterday morning." Clearly, though, you're using it as a preposition, and to would be a better choice.
|
| QUESTION |
Which usage is correct:
- I didn't have as good of a time as I expected to.
or
- I didn't have as good a time as I expected to.
I'm certain the "of" is unnecessary and incorrect, but I can't explain why. Could you give a good justification, heavy on the grammatical terms if possible? Thanks, Grammar
|
| SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE |
| Portland, Oregon Friday, August 14, 1998
|
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
In other words, you want me to make this sound as complicated as possible? Hmm. You're right about the "of" being unnecessary (and therefore incorrect). I think the "as I expect to" is kind of an elliptical clause (how's that?), standing for "as the time I expected to have." Principles of parallelism insist that we should compare like things; there is no reason to confuse the first "time" with a prepositional phrase (beginning with "of"). We can just compare the two "times": I didn't have as good a time as [the time] I expected to [have]. I hope that sounds hifalutin enough. If anyone else would like to take a stab at this, I'll provide an e-mail icon:
|
| QUESTION |
| Hello! Some time ago I participated a discussion about hockey. I stated that "some American hockey players behaved as vandals." I was critized about this by some people. In their opinion I didn't take into consideration that there might have been only one such player. In their opinion "some players" can be interpreted only so that they were at least two players while I have always believed that the expression is valid also in a case there happens to be only one player. I was told that English speaking people, practically speaking, always take this so that at least two objects are involved. However, I have seen pretty often when "some" or "a few" are used with a plural noun referring to one or more objects. What makes the interpretation of "at least one" invalid at this point ?
|
| SOURCE OF QUESTION & DATE OF RESPONSE |
| Espoo, Finland Saturday, August 15, 1998
|
| GRAMMAR'S RESPONSE |
| I'm not sure what you mean by "a plural noun referring to one or more objects," and I'm confused by your final question. Collective nouns (such as jury or team) can contain more than one "object," but when they're used collectively, they're one thing and take a singular verb, etc. In the context of the sentence you give us about "some hockey players," I'm afraid your friends are right: the clear implication is that more than one hockey player is involved. To suggest that there might only be only one involved, you'd have to use a phrase such as "at least one hockey player." If this response only confuses you further, please write again.
|
Previous Grammar Log