Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

An Unusual Grammatical Question.

  • 05-04-2009 6:52pm
    #1
    0507
    Registered Users Posts: 24 ✭


    I recently came across a very unusual grammatical construct and was wondering if someone who was better versed in these issues could bring out in technical terms why it appears so unusual. It comes from a short story and as far as I can tell it seems to be correct. However when I tried to look for similar usages on Google I came across very few - only two, in fact.

    Anyway, here's the extract in full - take into consideration that its a character speaking:


    "He prepares the food on my suggestion and yet I am not his master. He prepares the food for those dependent on him without their being his slaves. And he dares to invoke duty as his only motivation."


    It's the bit "without their being his slaves" which comes across as unusual.

    Any opinions?


Comments

  • #2
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #3
    FlutterinBantam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,575 ✭✭✭✭FlutterinBantam


    Perfectly OK I would opine, although rather arcane in it's usage.

    I would surmise that in fact it is not regularly used in the day to day reportage of these times.


  • #4
    0507
    Registered Users Posts: 24 ✭0507


    But would the use of the word "their" instead of "them" not imply that the possesion was on the side of the "slaves" rather than the "He"? "Their" seems to imply activity.

    Yet the sentence is clearly constructed around the possesion, or rather the negation of possesion, on the side of the "He".

    Maybe I'm making too much of this...


  • #5
    Thoie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,344 ✭✭✭Thoie


    It's pretty archaic alright, but valid - read some more Jane Austen for other examples of similar phrases.


  • #6
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    randylonghorn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,509 ✭✭✭✭randylonghorn


    It's slightly archaic all right, but "without them being his slaves" actually grates on my ears ... if I was proofreading this for someone, as I'm regularly asked to do, I would probably suggest changing it.

    That said, I can't give you a detailed technical explanation. I tend to rely on my ear, and a youth spent swallowing books (metaphorically speaking!) rather than an in-depth understanding of the minutiae of English grammar.

    EDIT: Ah ... thanks, df! :D


  • #8
    0507
    Registered Users Posts: 24 ✭0507


    donegalfella wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.


    You're probably right. But in your example there are clearly two subjects, while in my example it seems to be implied that the slaves should be the object of the sentence.

    I agree though, I think it probably is correct, if somewhat unusual and archaic. And if I'm to come clean: I wrote it myself. So cheers!


  • #9
    The Raven.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,008 ✭✭✭The Raven.


    donegalfella wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    A good and clear explanation, Donegal. The grammar seems perfectly normal to me.

    However, I'm not sure about the logic of the sentence:
    0507 wrote: »
    "He prepares the food for those dependent on him without their being his slaves."

    It would make more sense to me if it read:

    'He prepares the food for those dependent on him without his being their slave.'


  • #10
    FlutterinBantam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,575 ✭✭✭✭FlutterinBantam


    The Raven. wrote: »
    A good and clear explanation, Donegal. The grammar seems perfectly normal to me.

    However, I'm not sure about the logic of the sentence:



    It would make more sense to me if it read:

    'He prepares the food for those dependent on him without his being their slave.'


    Depends on what the writer is trying to say.

    Your example conveys the opposite meaning to the original statement,which ,while arcane in it's construction, is a very tight use of words to convey a situation.

    Your example is perfect, but is that what the writer wanted to convey??


Advertisement