Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Spanish
      • Home Country:
      • Dominican Republic
      • Current Location:
      • Dominican Republic

    • Join Date: Sep 2013
    • Posts: 247
    #1

    Confused about this correlative conjunction sintax and semantics.

    Dear teachers and members.


    I would like to know if the following correlative conjunction means what I think.

    «The insurance payout not only will ever eliminate Craig's debts but also allow him to continue his extravagant relationship with Summer and still not have to work for a living».

    I think this correlative conjunction meaning is as follows:

    a) The insurance payout not only will ever eliminate Craig's debts but also...

    b) Will allow him to continue his extravagant relationship with Summer.

    c) Will allow him still not have to work for a living.

    Are the parrallel established among the verbs eliminate, continue and have?

    Any information and guidance will be greatly appreciated


    The above excerpt was taken from 13:37 to 13:49 of the below video.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knP-orYgt-0
    Last edited by The apprentice; 16-Dec-2014 at 14:30.

  1. BobK's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • UK

    • Join Date: Jul 2006
    • Posts: 16,038
    #2

    Re: Confused about this correlative conjunction sintax and semantics.

    Let's get the transcription right first:
    The insurance payout not only would've eliminated Craig's debts but also allowed him to continue his extravagant relationship with Summer and still not have to work for a living.

    [He did have debts, but 'debt' here means 'indebtedness'.]
    (As so often with the form 'not only... but also', the writer makes the mistake of not observing parallelism:

    the payout would have not only [note the position] eliminated... but also allowed...

    He could have said "The insurance payout not only would've eliminated Craig's debt..." but then he should have continued "but also would've allowed...").

    The correlatively conjoined verbs (as far as I understand the terminology - I guess it's possible that someone who'd swallowed a thesaurus might call 'not only... but also' a 'correlative conjunction', but I'm not a connoisseur of this sort of hocus pocus ) are 'would've eliminated' and '[would've] allowed'. 'To continue...' and 'not have to work...' are the complement of 'allowed him'. I don't think these last two are anything to do with the correlative conjunction. But you might like to ask this question in the Diagramming... forum, which is frequented by people with more technical expertise than I have.

    b

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Spanish
      • Home Country:
      • Dominican Republic
      • Current Location:
      • Dominican Republic

    • Join Date: Sep 2013
    • Posts: 247
    #3

    Re: Confused about this correlative conjunction sintax and semantics.

    Thank you BobK for your transcription; this really helps me to improve my listening.

    Hoping for other members comments.

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • England
      • Current Location:
      • England

    • Join Date: Jun 2010
    • Posts: 24,453
    #4

    Re: Confused about this correlative conjunction sintax and semantics.

    I, too, thank Bob for his explanation.

    I didn't understand the question.

    (Still don't.)

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Spanish
      • Home Country:
      • Dominican Republic
      • Current Location:
      • Dominican Republic

    • Join Date: Sep 2013
    • Posts: 247
    #5

    Re: Confused about this correlative conjunction sintax and semantics.

    Thank you Rover_K for letting me know that you didn't understand and still don't understand my question.


    As for my question, I would like to know is the verb must be paralleled with the one after BUT ALSO... whether NOT ONLY... is inverted or not.

    a) «The insurance payout not only would have eliminated Craig's debts but also allowed him to continue his extravagant relationship with Summer and still not have to work for a living.».

    b) «Not only would have the insurance payout eliminated Craig's debts but also allowed him to continue his extravagant relationship with Summer and still not have to work for a living.».

    I mean the following; as BobK stated above:

    1)
    The insurance payout not only would have eliminated Craig's debts...

    2) But also would have
    allowed him to continue his extravagant relationship with Summer and still not have to work for a living.».


    Last edited by The apprentice; 18-Dec-2014 at 16:32.

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Australia
      • Current Location:
      • Australia

    • Join Date: Dec 2014
    • Posts: 42
    #6

    Re: Confused about this correlative conjunction sintax and semantics.

    These queries are often solvable by a net search - although that is less fun for us.

    NB syntax

    http://www.grammar-monster.com/gloss...njunctions.htm
    When Using Correlative Conjunctions, Keep a Parallel Structure

    When using correlative conjunctions, make sure the elements behind each one are the same type of word (like in the examples above). This is called a parallel structure. Look at these examples:


    • She is not only taking a holiday but also a pay rise. (In this example, the first half of the conjunction is in front of the main verb (taking) and the second half is in front of a noun phrase (a pay rise). It isn't parallel. It's wrong.)
    • She is taking not only a holiday but also a pay rise. (This version has a parallel structure.)
    • She is not only taking a holiday but also getting a pay rise. (This version also has a parallel structure.)



      Inverted form = Not only + helping verb + S +V + O but also S + V + O
      Not only do people need food but also people need shelter.

      Also I think this is acceptable:

      Not only do people need food but people/they also need shelter.
    • The error would be in omitting "need" after "but also".
    Last edited by jawgar; 19-Dec-2014 at 04:30.

  2. MikeNewYork's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Nov 2002
    • Posts: 24,983
    #7

    Re: Confused about this correlative conjunction sintax and semantics.

    Just for information, it is "pay raise" in AmE, not "pay rise".

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Apr 2009
    • Posts: 12,307
    #8

    Re: Confused about this correlative conjunction sintax and semantics.

    And as for your title, the word is "syntax." A "sin tax" is a different thing entirely.

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Spanish
      • Home Country:
      • Dominican Republic
      • Current Location:
      • Dominican Republic

    • Join Date: Sep 2013
    • Posts: 247
    #9

    Re: Confused about this correlative conjunction sintax and semantics.

    Thank you SoothingDave for correcting my typo.

  3. BobK's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • UK

    • Join Date: Jul 2006
    • Posts: 16,038
    #10

    Re: Confused about this correlative conjunction sintax and semantics.

    Spanish speakers have a big problem with this i/y thing. It's easy to get right if you did a bit of Greek at school (!): Greek ɩ (iota) → English i; Greek υ (upsilon) → English y. (I guess this tip will be useful to one reader in a thousand or more, but they'll find it really useful )

    b

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 24-Dec-2011, 14:40
  2. parallelism and correlative conjunction
    By Unregistered in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 27-Nov-2009, 03:15
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-Apr-2008, 12:46
  4. correlative both and
    By daisy1352 in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-Nov-2007, 02:08
  5. correlative conjunctions
    By emon in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 25-Jan-2007, 05:12

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
  •