[Grammar] You who...

[vince1234]

Hi!

Is it gramatically correct to say:

"You who IS my reason..."

or should I say

"You who ARE my reason..." ?

Thank you in advance!

Vince

 

[crazYgeeK]

I think you shouldn't.
As I know, the verb following who as a relative pronoun must be conjugated like as "He", "She", "It" stand for who, not "You", "They" stand for who
So you mustn't to write "You who are my reason..."
or something like "I who am feeling ...", it must be "I who is feeling..."
That's all my knowledge about this problem
Thanks

 

[vince1234]

In Italian and in French, for example, the relative pronoun
does not change the priority of the subject pronoun; therefore
you will say:

In Italian: Tu che SEI la mia ragione
In French: Toi qui ES ma raison

I would like te reiterate my question:

is it wrong to say

"You who ARE my reason"?

Is it right to say

"You who IS my reason"?

Thank you.

Vince

 

[TheParser]

In Italian and in French, for example, the relative pronoun
does not change the priority of the subject pronoun; therefore
you will say:

In Italian: Tu che SEI la mia ragione
In French: Toi qui ES ma raison

I would like te reiterate my question:

is it wrong to say

"You who ARE my reason"?

Is it right to say

"You who IS my reason"?

Thank you.

Vince

***** NOT A TEACHER *****

Hello, Vince.

(1) I'm pretty sure that most people always use "are" with "you."

(2) Study these sentences from a very good grammar book:


Who is that young man WHO talkS so loud?
The world has to obey him WHO thinkS and seeS in the world.
It is I WHO AM at fault.

(3) Therefore, the "correct" sentence is: You who are my reason.

(4) But we have a problem. Your sentence is not considered a sentence

in English.

(5) First, what do you mean by "who are my reason"? In English,

I don't think people would say something like that.

(6) Do you mean "who are my reason for living"?

(7) If you do, "You who are my reason for living" STILL is not a sentence

in English.

(8) I could use it this way:

This gift is for you, who are my reason for living.

(a) Now we can say that "who are my reason for living" is

an adjective clause that modifies "you." But it cannot be a

sentence all by itself.

(9) Please let us know what idea you wish to express. Then someone

will be happy to help. Maybe someone who speaks French or Italian

can do a better job in helping you than I.

***** Thank you *****

 

[oves]

would you mind telling the name of that very good grammar book?

Thanks

 

[TheParser]

would you mind telling the name of that very good grammar book?

Thanks

***** NOT A TEACHER *****

Hello, Oves.

(1) That very "good" book is also very "old" (1950!!!).

(2) It's entitled DESCRIPTIVE ENGLISH GRAMMAR by Professor Homer C.

House and Professor Susan Harman.

(3) It teaches grammar mainly by using the old-fashioned Reed-Kellogg

system of diagramming.

(a) Some students find that system VERY helpful in understanding English

grammar. (Today, most American teachers say it is a waste of time, and

95% (?) of American students have no idea of what it is. )

(b) This website has a forum called "Diagramming." If you visit that forum,

you can read threads that use this system. That forum has some people

who are experts in it. They will help you.

(4) This book is probably out-of-print.

***** Thank you *****

 

[crazYgeeK]

I think it should be 'You are the reason why...' (I live this life)
or 'You who were the reason why I have lived now become the reason why I give my life away.'
That's only my own ideas
I have had a mistake at my last post. 'who' as a relative pronoun always replaces noun or pronoun before it and the verb following has no changes in conjugation.
Thanks

 

[corum]

First I was thinking this way:
https://www.usingenglish.com/forum/ask-teacher/109526-not-you-but-i.html#post537112

At a later time, however, while I was reading TG, I stopped short in amazement:

[Who the reason are] is you. :cross:
[Who the reason is] is you. :tick:

[subject] = [Who the reason is]; [The reason (= singular 3rd person) [STRIKE]are[/STRIKE] is who]
who = the reason; the reason/who is you

It is you [who are the reason].
It is you who is the reason.

One of this pair of sentences is the extraposed variant of "Who the reason is is you."

Before the original subject's (the reason is Who) moving out of S into VP happened, 'the subject-clause' had a verb in singular.
Question: What changed the verb from 'is' into 'are'? And why?

If in
It is you [who *be the reason].
the bracketed part is a relative clause, then it follows that the relative clause together with what it describes, 'you', is a single nominal phrase contituent and can undergo NP movement.

You who *be the reason is. :cross:
Who *be the reason is you. :tick:

They, 'you' and 'who *be the reason', do not go hand-in-hand in the extraposed and 'non-extraposed' sentences, as the NP movement illustrates. If this is so, and this is so, then 'who' is not the antecedent of 'you'. No antecedent means no agreement. The noun phrase 'who' has to agree is:

[subject] = [Who the reason is]; [The reason (= singular 3rd person) [STRIKE]are[/STRIKE] is who]
who = the reason; the reason/who is you

Homer and Harman probably are two widely-acclaimed grammarians, but without knowing their motivation for their choice of 'are' and the lack of a principled account in defence of it, I can hardly yield to their view

 

[TheParser]

First I was thinking this way:
https://www.usingenglish.com/forum/ask-teacher/109526-not-you-but-i.html#post537112

At a later time, however, while I was reading TG, I stopped short in amazement:

[Who the reason are] is you. :cross:
[Who the reason is] is you. :tick:

[subject] = [Who the reason is]; [The reason (= singular 3rd person) [STRIKE]are[/STRIKE] is who]
who = the reason; the reason/who is you

It is you [who are the reason].
It is you who is the reason.

One of this pair of sentences is the extraposed variant of "Who the reason is is you."

Before the original subject's (the reason is Who) moving out of S into VP happened, 'the subject-clause' had a verb in singular.
Question: What changed the verb from 'is' into 'are'? And why?

If in
It is you [who *be the reason].
the bracketed part is a relative clause, then it follows that the relative clause together with what it describes, 'you', is a single nominal phrase contituent and can undergo NP movement.

You who *be the reason is. :cross:
Who *be the reason is you. :tick:

They, 'you' and 'who *be the reason', do not go hand-in-hand in the extraposed and 'non-extraposed' sentences, as the NP movement illustrates. If this is so, and this is so, then 'who' is not the antecedent of 'you'. No antecedent means no agreement. The noun phrase 'who' has to agree is:



Homer and Harman probably are two widely-acclaimed grammarians, but without knowing their motivation for their choice of 'are' and the lack of a principled account in defence of it, I can hardly yield to their view

***** NOT A TEACHER *****

Hello, Corum.

(1) I have exciting news: You are correct; my professor heroes are also
correct.

(2) It's a win - win for everyone!!!!!

(3) Yes, today the "correct" version is:

It is I who AM at fault. -- just as the two professors said.

(4) But Professor George O. Curme, another hero of mine, who writes from

a historical point of view, says that your version is indeed "correct" but it

is NOT usually used nowadays.

(5) Learners who come to this website want guidance in MODERN English.

So it is probably more helpful if learners are simply told to use "I who AM"

and "You who ARE."

***** Thank you *****

 

[BobK]

:up: Indeed, especially 5. ;-)

b