The Grammar Logs
#554

• "The Friends of Jasper National Park is a non-profit organization" but,
• "The Friends of Jasper National Park are starting a new project"

What is correct? Do different circumstances require different versions of a verb? Any advice? On a related note, I have another singular/plural, is/are question. How would you fix the following sentence:

"The Cavell Meadows are the most popular alpine and sub-alpine destination in Jasper National Park."

We're talking about one destination called "Cavell Meadows." Thanks for taking the time to look this over.

The second question is a bit easier, so I'll deal with that first. The determiner "the" in front of "Cavell Meadows" can confuse the sentence. If "Cavell Meadows" is a singular place, then we'd use the singular "is" in that sentence — like "The U.S. Virgin Islands is a territory of the United States." Now if it's possible for one meadow to be considered separately from another meadow (which I doubt), the plural would be possible. "The Cavell Meadows are beautiful in the springtime" just as we could say, geographically, "The Virgin Islands are beautiful."

If the Friends of Jasper National Park is acting as a singular corporate entity (true of the first sentence), you'd use that singular "is." If, however, the members are acting as individuals, it's possible to use a plural verb. The difference is sometimes perplexing. For instance, we'd say that Ford is a giant carmaker, but in the same paragraph we might say (referring to the people who make up the Ford Motor Company) that "they are offering a new line of vans this fall."

Satement: Parents were present on our sports day. Query: What's the function of the word "present" in the above sentence; as adjective or past participle? Thank you.

It's a predicate adjective. The adjective "present" means "in view" or "at hand" or "involved." The past participle of the verb "to present" would be "presented," as in "They have presented several new proposals during this session."

Can one be self-conscious of something or is that incorrect due to the term's implication that one is conscious of oneself? For example, would it be correct to write the following sentence:

"He was self-conscious [of / about] his nose"?

Yes, you can be self-consicous about something other than "self" — because the phrase can simply mean "ill at ease." Thus, one can be self-conscious about one's nose." (It also implies that one thinks everyone in the room is looking at one's nose, so the "self" part of it is certainly appropriate.)

Why is it said "to fell a tree" instead of "to fall a tree"? I know one is present and one is past tense, but it seems to be more of passive vs. active thing.

The words "fall" and "fell" are certainly related, but in the sense of "felling a tree" — a transitive verb meaning to cut or knock down — the verb comes from the Old English fellan or the Dutch vellen, and an object is required, the tree in this case. The verb fall cannot be used in a transitive sense this way; instead, we'd write "The tree fell" (there is no object to the verb). But the tree can fall, in that sense, without any human interaction — the use of an ax, say.

When using an 's with an italicized title, like the Chicago Tribune's report on . . . , should the 's be italicized or underlined with the name of the publication or left in regular type?

When underlining or italicizing the name of a newspaper (or whatever), when that name is pluralized or made possessive, do not underline or italicize the possessive or plural ending: The Chicago Tribune's report had too many whereases.

Authority: The Gregg Reference Manual by William A. Sabin. 9th Edition. McGraw-Hill: New York. 2001. Used with the consent of Glencoe/McGraw-Hill. p. 79.

• You treat me like no one has ever treated me.
• You treat me as nobody has ever treated me.

I was wondering if either or neither of these would be correct? I don't know about the usage of the words "no one" versus "nobody." Thanks

You definitely want the "as" because the word is being used to introduce a clause. But you also need "as nobody else has ever treated me." As for the difference between "no one" and "nobody," there isn't any; use whichever sounds better to you.

Our local small town newspaper writes articles by using a form of grammar that I'm not certain is correct. Many articles will start with "In connection to" a local robbery. I think that it should be "in connection with." Which is correct?

That seems like an odd phrase, in either case, to use at the beginning of an article. But "with" would be, by far, the more common and acceptable idiom. In addition, "in connection with" is often a vague kind of connector. In a sentence like "He was wanted in connection with alleged firearms violations," the word "for" would be much more precise and efficient.

From The Oxford Dictionary of American Usage and Styleby Bryan Garner. Copyright 1995 by Bryan A. Garner. Published by Oxford University Press, Inc., www.oup-usa.org, and used with the gracious consent of Oxford University Press.

In the sentence :

Who can jump the ____ ? Carlos or Lee?

Would you use higher since you are talking about 2 people? Or would you use highest — it sounds better? Which is correct? Thanks.

You could ask (about these two), "Who can jump higher?" But you're right about "the highest." If you include "the," use the superlative form, "highest," even if you're talking about only two people.

Here is a reference from the chapter 16 of Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen:

"The gentlemen did approach; and when Mr. Wickham walked into the room, Elizabeth felt that she had neither been seeing him before, nor thinking of him since, with the smallest degree of unreasonable admiration."

My question is how the "scope of negation" affects the meaning of the prepositional phrase; How are negative words "neither" and "nor" modifying "smallest" and "unreasonable" of the phrase? How had Elzabeth been seeing him?

I think it means that his appearance on the scene (the womenfolk had been awaiting the arrival of the gentlemen for a long time) did not surprise Elizabeth at all: he was everything she hoped and thought he should be. In short, her high estimation of what he would be like proved not to be, in the least degree, unreasonable. I'll leave an e-mail icon here in case more subtle readers of Jane Austen can offer a better explanation.

Is the verb in the following sentence an action or a linking verb?

"Their hiding places APPEAR under the sand."

"Appear" is often a linking verb, but it reveals a state of being when it links: "The wicked stepmother appeared malevolent." In your sentence, "appear" is an action verb; it's something that the hiding places do (they "show up" or "reveal themselves").

Previous Grammar Log

Next Grammar Log

Index of Grammar Logs

Guide to Grammar and Writing