Blog Summary 1: Is WHO really SINGULAR???

Dear all,

Since Ron has not posted his reading summary for Blog 1, he lost 30 points, and I am posting the summary of the other ENGL300 section. It was done by Shanaka Adams. You have time to respond to it on Friday, Sept. 3rd, when class is canceled, and during the weekend. It is due on Monday, Sept. 6th, at class start.

Here is Sylvia Chalker's protest article again, which you've all read (it is published on our website).

Before you get too excited about Sylvia Chalker's (not so bad) ideas, be aware that WHO is, in fact, really followed by verbs in SINGULAR, according to existing grammar rules. Even if she offers plausible reasons why, logically, plural might be better in some cases, she did NOT create a new grammar rule ;-)

Here is the ORIGINAL ARTICLE written by Geoffrey Leech that Sylvia Chalker was so upset about (just one page).

_________________________________________________
Blog 1: Summary of Sylvia Chalker's, "Is WHO Really Singular?"

Chalker's article examines the role of "who" in certain grammatical situations. She argues that Professor Leech's view that a probing "who" as a subject is a singular verb even when a plural answer can be given. He suggests that in this instance the "who" is singular and if used as a plural, it is grammatically incorrect. The author of "Is WHO really singular", disagrees. She states that both singular and plural verbs are acceptable and okay to use if necessary to indicate a plural answer. She argues that the interrogative "who" isn't just grammatically singular or plural but the actual link to the meaning of it in a sentence. "Who" as a subject can convey various meanings in a sentence whether singular or plural.