Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : SI Grammar and Spelling Lab -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (2497)	5/21/1999 3:25:00 PM
From: jbe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4711

Christopher, the sentence you have provided does NOT "put the same concept in a way that makes it clearer." When I die I plan to give my house to both my children. Notice there is a singular direct object (house), and a plural indirect object(children). My sentence had a plural direct object ("you both"). In both cases, common sense dictates the meaning. A more appropriate way of putting the concept (in a way that makes it clearer, of course): "The judge sentenced the traitors to death by hanging." Following your logic, this means that the traitors were to be hanged in the same noose. (Avoiding the use of "both of the traitors" or "all of the traitors" would not change the "collective" sense of the plural noun "traitors.") But do you really think anyone is going to recast that sentence as follows: "The judge sentenced each of the traitors to death by hanging." Where on earth did you dig up this each/both "rule"? What 18th-century grammarian can you cite in support of it? jbe