He disagreed with the professor's theory calling him a moron

[alpacinou]

I heard something like this on Youtube yesterday:

He objected to the professor's latest theory calling him a moron.

The second clause does not have a subject.

I feel like something is missing in the second part and it's a bit odd in terms of grammar. I mean I have heard in many times and I know it's correct but what structure is that and what is the rule?

 

[SoothingDave]

The rule is to use proper punctuation so that people can understand what you mean. Did the professor's theory posit that he was a moron? Or did the person object to the theory (about whatever) and call the professor a "moron"?

 

[GoesStation]

It's a carelessly-written sentence that doesn't make sense. It's not possible to analyze non-meaningful sentences.

 

[Tdol]

That sounds more like an opinion than a theory to me.

 

[jutfrank]

This is a great example of a dangling participle phrase, isn't it? Is it 'He' or the professor who is being called a moron?

I assume in speech it was made clear by prosody (intonation and pausing) that it was the professor who's the moron, but the lack of a comma in this transcription makes it read the other way.

I feel like something is missing in the second part

Yes—an all-important comma.

Can we have a link to the video, please?

 

[jutfrank]

It's a carelessly-written sentence that doesn't make sense. It's not possible to analyze non-meaningful sentences.

But it's not written (originally) and it does make sense, apparently. As alpacinoutd says in post #1, it's from a YouTube video. I assume that means somebody actually said it.

 

[alpacinou]

Sorry folks I could not find the video. But I am fairly certain this is what I heard. Maybe this will make it more clear:

Professor Johnson objected strongly to the professor Smith's latest theory calling him (Smith) a moron.

 

[GoesStation]

Sorry folks I could not find the video. But I am fairly certain this is what I heard. Maybe this will make it more clear:

Professor Johnson objected strongly to [STRIKE]the[/STRIKE] professor Smith's latest theory, calling him (Smith) a moron.

Adding a comma makes it comprehensible.

 

[alpacinou]

Adding a comma makes it comprehensible.

So what is the grammar rule? The second clause does not have a subject

 

[jutfrank]

What grammar rule are you asking about?

The part after the missing comma is a (dependent) participle clause, the implied subject of which is He. I'd say that it's functioning as an adverbial modifier, if we are to understand that the clause gives information as to the way he made the objection.

At least, that's the analysis I'm going with until a) I change my mind or b) somebody with some grammar expertise (Paul?) comes along and tells me how wide of the mark I am.

Are you sure this was a real sentence? I wouldn't want to think you're asking us to analyse a sentence you've made up. Why is the sentence in post #7 so different from the one in post #1? You say that you're "fairly certain" that that's what you heard. Can't you just check your YouTube history?

 

[alpacinou]

What grammar rule are you asking about?

The part after the missing comma is a (dependent) participle clause, the implied subject of which is He. I'd say that it's functioning as an adverbial modifier, if we are to understand that the clause gives information as to the way he made the objection.

At least, that's the analysis I'm going with until a) I change my mind or b) somebody with some grammar expertise (Paul?) comes along and tells me how wide of the mark I am.

Are you sure this was a real sentence? I wouldn't want to think you're asking us to analyse a sentence you've made up. Why is the sentence in post #7 so different from the one in post #1? You say that you're "fairly certain" that that's what you heard. Can't you just check your YouTube history?

I watch lots and lots of videos on Youtube and some of them are long and I could not find that particular part.

But I guarantee you I did not make up that sentence.

In post 7 I elaborated to dispel confusion. I mean I added some parts because the original sentence was stated out of context and it was not clear.

 

[emsr2d2]

When you note down quotes from YouTube videos in future, please make sure you actually note the title and speaker (if possible, save the link to the video and post it as part of your question here).

 

[alpacinou]

When you note down quotes from YouTube videos in future, please make sure you actually note the title and speaker (if possible, save the link to the video and post it as part of your question here).

Yes sir of course.

But this sentence is grammatically correct right? :

Professor Johnson objected strongly to the professor Smith's latest theory calling him (Smith) a moron.

 

[Tarheel]

Yes sir of course.

But this sentence is grammatically correct right? :

Professor Johnson objected strongly to the professor Smith's latest theory, calling him (Smith) a moron.

I put the comma back where it belongs. One, yes, it is grammatical. Two, it's very impolite.

 

[GoesStation]

Yes sir of course.

Why do you think ems is a man?

But this sentence is grammatically correct, right? [no colon]

Professor Johnson objected strongly to the professor Smith's latest theory calling him (Smith) a moron.

No. It has an incorrect definite article and it's missing a required comma.

 

[alpacinou]

Why do you think ems is a man?


No. It has an incorrect definite article and it's missing a required comma.

Ems is a lady? I had no idea.


Professor Johnson objected strongly to the professor Smith's latest theory, calling him (Smith) a moron.

May I ask why "the" is redundant?

 

[SoothingDave]

He didn't say it was "redundant." It's incorrect because it is a title. It should be "Professor Smith," with a capital letter.

 

[alpacinou]

He didn't say it was "redundant." It's incorrect because it is a title. It should be "Professor Smith," with a capital letter.

Doesn't the define theory?

 

[GoesStation]

Ems is a lady? I had no idea.

It doesn't matter what sex ems is. It's impolite to assume that any unknown person is male.

Doesn't "the" define "theory"?

The possessive Professor Smith's does that.

Always mark words your text discusses by surrounding them with quotation marks.

 

[SoothingDave]

"The latest theory by Professor Smith"

vs.

"Professor Smith's latest theory"