[Grammar] Subject-Verb Agreement

[svartnik]

Originally Posted by 2006

That statement adds nothing to your side of the 'debat'e.

Do you mean according your opinion or otherwise?

preference --> aversion = + --> - = like --> dislike. I am sticking to it.
This thread is more related to philosophy than grammar.
I quit this thread. Thanks.

[engee30]

I just took a look at the first and last posts of this thread, and the only thing that comes into my mind is the question, Why should one split the subject into two subjects? Why - because of the presence of the conjunction and?

The widely held strong preference for sweetness and aversion to bitter or sour flavors is/are innate.

The thing that one should be most interested in is the matter of a preference for something against an aversion to something else, not the two issues dealt with separately, as the use of and would suggest. The crux of the matter is the juxtaposition of preference and aversion, so to speak.

[svartnik]

One last thing:

Originally Posted by 2006

"preference" doesn't simply mean "what you choose". "preference" expresses liking something more than something else.

And what do people choose? What they like more than anything that they like less. I meant "choose" in this sense.
We are of one mind but we fail to say the same thing, IMO.

[Monticello]

2006:

Originally Posted by 2006

My post 10 has nothing to do with "context", which is your word, and I have repeatedly said that there is no context. I think you need to familiarize yourself with the meaning of the word.

No. The word, context, is not my word, but a commonly used and understood word from the English language. It seems that you may need a refresher here on its meaning:

context SYLLABICATION:con·textPRONUNCIATION: kntkstNOUN:1. The part of a text or statement that surrounds a particular word or passage and determines its meaning. 2. The circumstances in which an event occurs; a setting. ETYMOLOGY:Middle English, composition, from Latin contextus, from past participle of contexere, to join together : com-, com- + texere, to weave; see teks- in Appendix I.

Once again, your statement from post #10 from this thread:

If one wants to argue that they are two sides of the same thing, one can choose "is", but again to me they are two different things.

Now, let's apply your statement directly to the above dictionary definition. To do this with absolute clarity, let's substitute your use of the pronoun "they" with its referent phrase from the original posed sentence:

If one wants to argue that [the widely held strong preference for sweetness and aversion to bitter or sour flavors] are two sides of the same thing, one can choose "is", but again to me they are two different things.

Clearly, the above bracketed and highlighted phrase is, as the dictionary definition states, "part of a text or statement that surrounds a particular word or passage," and, just as clearly, within the sentence quoted above, you yourself state: "one [may] choose "is", " and thus "determine [a] meaning" that would allow for a singular subject.

Clearly, your statement here, coupled directly with the above dictionary definition, demonstrates your recognition of the importance of context to this discussion. For you to persist in denying your recognition of the importance of context to the discussion is to further demonstrate your obstinate unreasonableness.

Originally Posted by 2006

You're fighting a losing battle. Give it a rest!

This is not a battle, but a debate. And clearly, your decision to put forward a crucial statement that is very clear in its meaning, and then later to persistently deny its clear meaning, demonstrates tactics and reasoning that cannot be taken seriously within any rational discussion. If you should decide to be taken seriously in future discussions, you might consider reviewing an objective source on the matter: A Code of Conduct for Effective Rational Discussion. (Please pay careful attention to the following two sublinks within the previous link: 1.The Clarity Principle, 2. The Resolution Principle.)

As to the matter of the question posed for this thread: It is now sufficient for those foreign language students, who may still have any questions related to the subject and verb agreement of the posed sentence that began this discussion, to review the arguments presented here in light of their rational basis, and come to a decision for themselves what usage is best based upon the merits of those arguments.