her dog

[navi tasan]

1) Her dog plays with Sally a lot. His name is Furry. Sally takes Furry to the park every day and plays with him for at least two hours.
2) Her dog loves Sally a lot. His name is Furry. Sally takes Furry to the park every day and plays with him for at least two hours.

Would these work if 'her' meant 'Sally's'? Sally's dog plays with Sally a lot. Sally's dog loves Sally a lot.

Gratefully,
Navi.

 

[GoesStation]

Yes, those are fine.

 

[Barb_D]

Eh.... I'm not sure I agree.

I agree that people will know what you mean, but it's not good style at all.

Sally has dog who plays with her a lot.
Note you said that the dog plays with her, and then in your other sentence, you say that she plays with him.

So
Sally has a dog she plays with a lot. His name is Furry. Sally takes Furry to the park every day and they play for at least two hours.

 

[Tdol]

They're possible, but I'd expect Sally to be something like the dog-walker another woman, mentioned earlier in the text, had hired.

 

[Raymott]

Yes, but the question specifies "Would these work if 'her' meant 'Sally's'?"
No, they wouldn't. I disagree with Barb that people would know what they mean, because we've already demonstrated that they don't.

 

[Tdol]

It's another case of a decontexualised sentence. However, I do agree that most contexts would not equate her with Sally.