[Grammar] whose job it is ...

[yungchunli]

Dear Sir / Madam:

Is it correct to say "He is a school teacher whose job it is to give lectures in classroom." ? I would say .... whose job is to give lectures in classroom. But the radio and TV news have always inevitably added "it" between job and is. Please kindly advise me.

Brgds
yc li

 

[5jj]

Welcome to the forum, yungchunli, :hi:

The 'it' is fine, though not essential. but not much else is natural. Few teachers would describe their job as lecturing in the classroom; even if they did, 'the' is necessary. If you are saying what job a schoolteacher does, then we need a comma after 'schoolteacher'. If you are talking about one particular teacher whose job is to lecture rather than teach, then you could say:

He is a schoolteacher whose job (it) is to lecture in classrooms/the classroom.

That sounds a little strange though - if his job is lecturing, then he is now a lecturer.

 

[emsr2d2]

Sometimes we need "it" and sometimes we don't. Look at the following sentences:

The man, whose house it is, is sitting over there.
The man whose house is over there, is sitting over here.

Edit: Apologies - I noticed later in the thread that someone had pointed out a missing comma in my post. I posted this from my phone where it's nigh on impossible to tell whether some punctuation marks have actually come out.

 

[tzfujimino]

The man whose house it is, is sitting over there.

Hello, emsr2d2.:-D
This is an interesting construction I'm not used to.
If I divide the sentence into two, could it be something like :

The man is sitting over there.
It is his house.

Thank you in advance.
:-D

 

[bhaisahab]

Hello, emsr2d2.:-D
This is an interesting construction I'm not used to.
If I divide the sentence into two, could it be something like :

The man is sitting over there.
It is his house.

Thank you in advance.
:-D

Yes.

 

[yungchunli]

Dear Moderator:

I still don't quite understand your explanantion. I am taught to say " He is a newspaper reporter whose job is to write about what is happening in the world." In fact my teacher will say it is grammatically wrong to say "whos job it is to write about ...".

I did not mean "lecture" as in reprimand in my example sentence. I simply meant giving lessons in general.

Brgds
yc li

 

[BobK]

...I did not mean "lecture" as in reprimand in my example sentence. I simply meant giving lessons in general.

Brgds
yc li

No, it's not the 'reprimand' sort of 'lecture'. But giving lectures is not typically what a schoolteacher does (if s/he's any good at his/her job). A lecturer lectures and a teacher teaches. If your man is a teacher his job is to teach (not to lecture).

b

 

[tzfujimino]

Dear Moderator:

I still don't quite understand your explanantion. I am taught to say " He is a newspaper reporter whose job is to write about what is happening in the world." In fact my teacher will say it is grammatically wrong to say "whose job it is to write about ...".

yc li

Hello.:-D
Well, how about this:

1. He is a schoolteacher. His job is to lecture in classrooms/the classroom.
He is a schoolteacher whose job is to lecture in classrooms/the classroom.

2. He is a schoolteacher. It is his job to lecture in classrooms/the classroom.
He is a schoolteacher whose job it is to lecture in classrooms/the classroom.

Are #1 and #2 convincing to you? I hope you'll understand what I mean.

 

[NewHopeR]

Hello.:-D
Well, how about this:

1. He is a schoolteacher. His job is to lecture in classrooms/the classroom.
He is a schoolteacher whose job is to lecture in classrooms/the classroom.

2. He is a schoolteacher. It is his job to lecture in classrooms/the classroom.
He is a schoolteacher whose job it is to lecture in classrooms/the classroom.

Are #1 and #2 convincing to you? I hope you'll understand what I mean.

I understand "whose job it" as parallel subjects (of a clause). I'm sure I've got it.


And, the structure of the emsr2d2's example "The man whose house it is, is sitting over there" reminds me that OP's sentence "He is a school teacher whose job it is to give lectures in classroom" is equal to "He is a school teacher whose job it is, is to give lectures in classroom." Am I on the right track?

 

[5jj]

And, the structure of the emsr2d2's example "The man whose house it is, is sitting over there" reminds me that OP's sentence "He is a school teacher whose job it is to give lectures in classroom" is equal to "He is a school teacher whose job it is, is to give lectures in classroom." Am I on the right track?

I feel that the comma in ems's sentences is a mistake:

The man whose house it is, is sitting over there.:cross:
The man whose house is over there, is sitting over here..:cross:

We cannot separate a subject from its verb by one comma. We can use two commas for a non-defining relative clause functioning parenthetically within a main clause, or one comma to separate the non-defining relative clause from the main clause:

That man, whose house this is, is drinking rather a lot.
I am impressed by the interior design ideas of that man, whose house this is.

So, "He is a school teacher whose job it is, is to give lectures in classroom" is incorrect. The two sentences below are correct:

He is a schoolteacher whose job it is to teach infants. (As opposed to one whise job it is to teach teenagers.)
He is a school teacher, whose job it is to teach infants. (I am telling you a little more about his job.

 

[NewHopeR]

I feel that the comma in ems's sentences is a mistake: We cannot separate a subject from its verb by one comma. We can use two commas for a non-defining relative clause functioning parenthetically within a main clause, or one comma to separate the non-defining relative clause from the main clause:

That man, whose house this is, is drinking rather a lot.
I am impressed by the interior design ideas of that man, whose house this is.

So, "He is a school teacher whose job it is, is to give lectures in classroom" is incorrect. The two sentences below are correct:

He is a schoolteacher whose job it is to teach infants. (As opposed to one whise job it is to teach teenagers.)
He is a school teacher, whose job it is to teach infants. (I am telling you a little more about his job.

Thank you 5jj.

Now I've known the structure "whose job it is" to be correct, but I still don't know HOW.
Since emsr2d2, tzfujimino, tzfujimino et al have made this mistake altogether, it might be "a big deal" worth to be explored.

I've said "parallel subjects (of a clause). "Whose job" is one, "it" another. I think so because it helps to understand, not I'm sure that the phrase is established in an authoritative grammatical book.

 

[5jj]

Now I've known the structure "whose job it is" to be correct, but I still don't know HOW.

I thought tzfujimino did a pretty good job of explanation in post #6.

Since emsr2d2, tzfujimino et al have made this mistake altogether...]ems did not make a mistake about the construction. She just, in my opinion, used a comma inappropriately. This is a common mistake - there is actually a slight pause at that stage when the sentence is spoken. tzfujimino had not met the construction before, but soon understood it.

 

[NewHopeR]

I thought tzfujimino did a pretty good job of explanation in post #6.

Since emsr2d2, tzfujimino et al have made this mistake altogether...]ems did not make a mistake about the construction. She just, in my opinion, used a comma inappropriately. This is a common mistake - there is actually a slight pause at that stage when the sentence is spoken. tzfujimino had not met the construction before, but soon understood it.

Emsr2d2's sentence should be "The man, whose house it is, is sitting over there." With two commas it is spotless now?
So OP's sentence "He is a school teacher whose job it is to give lectures in classroom" actually refers to "He is a school teacher, whose job it is, is to give lectures in classroom"?
The second "is" ought to be added (to help us well understand it)?

 

[5jj]

Emsr2d2's sentence should be "The man, whose house it is, is sitting over there." With two commas it is spotless now?

Not exactly. If we are going to use a non-defining clause, then the antecedent is normally defined in some way, such as 'The rich man' or 'that man'.
So OP's sentence "He is a school teacher whose job it is to give lectures in classroom" actually refers to "He is a school teacher, whose job it is, is to give lectures in classroom"?

No. The red sentence contains a defining relative clause. 'He' is an in-classroom-lecture-delivering schoolteacher. The blue sentence is not correct English. If you omit the second, incorrect 'is' then the sentence contains a non-defining relative clause telling us more about the schoolteacher.

It is normally possible to remove a non-defining relative clause without damaging the main clause. If we did that with your (blue) sentence, we'd end up with: He is a school teacher is to give lectures in classroom, which is clearly wrong.

 

[NewHopeR]

No. The red sentence contains a defining relative clause. 'He' is an in-classroom-lecture-delivering schoolteacher. The blue sentence is not correct English. If you omit the second, incorrect 'is' then the sentence contains a non-defining relative clause telling us more about the schoolteacher.

It is normally possible to remove a non-defining relative clause without damaging the main clause. If we did that with your (blue) sentence, we'd end up with: He is a school teacher is to give lectures in classroom, which is clearly wrong.

I see. Did you mean "whose job it is" is the defining clause there?

 

[BobK]

Hello.:-D
Well, how about this:

1. He is a schoolteacher. His job is to lecture in classrooms/the classroom.
He is a schoolteacher whose job is to lecture in classrooms/the classroom.

2. He is a schoolteacher. It is his job to lecture in classrooms/the classroom.
He is a schoolteacher whose job it is to lecture in classrooms/the classroom.

Are #1 and #2 convincing to you? I hope you'll understand what I mean.

No no, no! Teachers don't lecture (although maybe in your part of the world they do!) An academic lecture lasts usually a little less than an hour and involves little or no interaction with the students. Please read the many posts that say this again and again. ;-)

b

 

[emsr2d2]

I think you are misunderstanding the point. We are not pointing out an error with grammar, we are pointing out an error in the verb you are using to go with the different types of educators.

Teacher = to teach
Lecturer = to lecture

He is a schoolteacher whose job is to teach in classrooms.
He is a lecturer whose job is to lecture at a university.

 

[tzfujimino]

No no, no! Teachers don't lecture (although maybe in your part of the world they do!) An academic lecture lasts usually a little less than an hour and involves little or no interaction with the students. Please read the many posts that say this again and again. ;-)

b

Hello.:-D
Yes, I do understand it.:-D I had read 5jj's comments in post #2 ('That sounds a little strange though - if his job is lecturing, then he is now a lecturer.') and yours in post #7 ('A lecturer lectures, and a teacher teaches.') before I posted it.
I simply made an attempt to show how those sentences are combined together with a relative pronoun 'whose'.
I admit the 'teacher-lecture' collocation was not good. Thank you for reminding me.:-D

P.S. Incidentally, 'lecture' has become part of the Japanese language.:-D