Results 1 to 6 of 6
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Canada
      • Current Location:
      • Switzerland

    • Join Date: Aug 2009
    • Posts: 1,676
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #1

    Verb repetition

    "These predictions will be purely informal, will have no binding character, and will not oblige X to place orders."

    Is it necessary to repeat "will"?

    Thanks!

  1. 5jj's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • England
      • Current Location:
      • Czech Republic

    • Join Date: Oct 2010
    • Posts: 28,135
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #2

    Re: Verb repetition

    Quote Originally Posted by Jasmin165 View Post
    "These predictions will be purely informal, will have no binding character, and will not oblige X to place orders."

    Is it necessary to repeat "will"?
    No. It's a matter of personal preference.

  2. Banned
    Interested in Language
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Hungarian
      • Home Country:
      • Hungary
      • Current Location:
      • Hungary

    • Join Date: Feb 2010
    • Posts: 1,121
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #3

    Re: Verb repetition

    These predictions [will be purely informal] and [will have no binding character]. - conjoined predicates



    These predictions will be purely informal and will have no binding character. -- Is it an instance of conjoined predicates where the second operator is ellipted? or conjoined predications? The two cases give different meanings to the sentence.

    ------
    -----

    These predictions will be purely informal, will have no binding character, and will not oblige X to place orders. -- conjoined predicates

    =

    These predictions will [be purely informal], [have no binding character], and [not oblige X to place orders]. -- conjoined predications
    Here, the last conjoin suggests we have three conjoined predications.



    These predictions [will be purely informal], [have no binding character], and [does not oblige X to place orders]. -- conjoined predicates (not predications)

    Quote Originally Posted by fivejedjon View Post
    No. It's a matter of personal preference.
    Agreed. Matter of style.

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Canada
      • Current Location:
      • Switzerland

    • Join Date: Aug 2009
    • Posts: 1,676
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #4

    Re: Verb repetition

    Quote Originally Posted by corum View Post
    These predictions [will be purely informal] and [will have no binding character]. - conjoined predicates



    These predictions will be purely informal and will have no binding character. -- Is it an instance of conjoined predicates where the second operator is ellipted? or conjoined predications? The two cases give different meanings to the sentence.

    ------
    -----

    These predictions will be purely informal, will have no binding character, and will not oblige X to place orders. -- conjoined predicates

    =

    These predictions will [be purely informal], [have no binding character], and [not oblige X to place orders]. -- conjoined predications
    Here, the last conjoin suggests we have three conjoined predications.



    These predictions [will be purely informal], [have no binding character], and [does not oblige X to place orders]. -- conjoined predicates (not predications)



    Agreed. Matter of style.
    I appreciate your effort, but I didn't understand half the words you used. My guess is that most people don't have the slightest clue what "conjoined predications" are. Where do you get these terms?
    Last edited by Allen165; 23-Dec-2010 at 10:37.

  3. 5jj's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • England
      • Current Location:
      • Czech Republic

    • Join Date: Oct 2010
    • Posts: 28,135
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #5

    Re: Verb repetition

    Quote Originally Posted by Jasmin165 View Post
    My guess is that most people don't have the slightest clue of what "conjoined predications" are.
    I am not sure whether what I write below is in line with Corum's views or not, as I don't spend a lot of time on conjoined predications. I am simply trying to explain why in answer to your original question, my answer was, 'It's a matter of personal preference". I should have added, "with this utterance".

    If your original sentence had been

    "These predictions will be purely informal, will have no binding character, and will leave X free to do as he pleases",

    then will cannot be omitted. This is because 'have' and 'leave' could be interpreted as present simple forms in the version without will.

    However, in your original:

    "These predictions will be purely informal, will have no binding character, and will not oblige X to place orders",

    omission of will leaves have and not oblige. Not oblige is not possible as a present simple form and is appropriate only if the omitted will is understood. It is therefore natural to assume that have is also dependent on an omitted will.

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Canada
      • Current Location:
      • Switzerland

    • Join Date: Aug 2009
    • Posts: 1,676
    • Post Thanks / Like
    #6

    Re: Verb repetition

    Quote Originally Posted by fivejedjon View Post
    I am not sure whether what I write below is in line with Corum's views or not, as I don't spend a lot of time on conjoined predications. I am simply trying to explain why in answer to your original question, my answer was, 'It's a matter of personal preference". I should have added, "with this utterance".

    If your original sentence had been

    "These predictions will be purely informal, will have no binding character, and will leave X free to do as he pleases",

    then will cannot be omitted. This is because 'have' and 'leave' could be interpreted as present simple forms in the version without will.

    However, in your original:

    "These predictions will be purely informal, will have no binding character, and will not oblige X to place orders",

    omission of will leaves have and not oblige. Not oblige is not possible as a present simple form and is appropriate only if the omitted will is understood. It is therefore natural to assume that have is also dependent on an omitted will.
    I now get it. Great explanation!

    Thank you.

Similar Threads

  1. emphasis by repetition
    By kvvic in forum Editing & Writing Topics
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-Aug-2010, 11:01
  2. [Grammar] Avoiding repetition
    By maral55 in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-Apr-2010, 19:56
  3. Repetition of the subject
    By ripley in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 14-Nov-2008, 18:27
  4. Repetition?
    By Deepurple in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 22-Apr-2008, 03:48
  5. Repetition
    By HaraKiriBlade in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 30-Nov-2006, 22:56

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •