Reply
Wed 19 Mar, 2008 03:31 am
1. Part of the reason for the company's going bankrupt is incompetence of the staff.
2. One of the reasons for the company's going bankrupt is incompetence of the staff.
Are both sentences correct?
Many thanks.
Re: correct phrase
Yoong Liat wrote:1. Part of the reason for the company's going bankrupt is incompetence of the staff.
2. One of the reasons for the company's going bankrupt is incompetence of the staff.
Are both sentences correct?
Many thanks.
Yes, I believe so.
However, I would say "THE incompetence of the staff" in both sentences, and I think the second is preferable.
the grammar is as nothing compared with the phraseology, as ever, yours '
Part of the reason for the company's going bankrupt is incompetence of the staff.
Part of the reason for the company's bankruptcy is the incompetence of the staff.
Re: correct phrase
Yoong Liat wrote:1. Part of the reason for the company's going bankrupt is incompetence of the staff.
2. One of the reasons for the company's going bankrupt is incompetence of the staff.
Are both sentences correct?
Many thanks.
Neither 1. nor 2. is correct. If you refer to the plural then it is companies. Company's don't own 'going bankrupt' so an inverted comma is inappropriate, muchly like my posts.
Re: correct phrase
solipsister wrote:Yoong Liat wrote:1. Part of the reason for the company's going bankrupt is incompetence of the staff.
2. One of the reasons for the company's going bankrupt is incompetence of the staff.
Are both sentences correct?
Many thanks.
Neither 1. nor 2. is correct. If you refer to the plural then it is companies. Company's don't own 'going bankrupt' so an inverted comma is inappropriate, muchly like my posts.
I look forward to his visiting me. (I think this sentence is fine although visiting doesn't belong to him. So ...
the company's going bankrupt is fine too.
The other members didn't comment abou this, so let's hear from other members.
Re: correct phrase
solipsister wrote:Yoong Liat wrote:1. Part of the reason for the company's going bankrupt is incompetence of the staff.
2. One of the reasons for the company's going bankrupt is incompetence of the staff.
Are both sentences correct?
Many thanks.
Neither 1. nor 2. is correct. If you refer to the plural then it is companies. Company's don't own 'going bankrupt' so an inverted comma is inappropriate, muchly like my posts.
This is incorrect. Please ignore.
I think solip may have a point (except that he/she should have refered to an apostrophe). The original sentence should not have used "company's".
Part of the reason for the company going bankrupt is incompetence of the staff.
The bankruptcy does however belong to the company. so an apostrophy is in order
I have refined your sentence into a simpler form. It is generally better to say things in the simplest possible form.
Part of the reason for the company's bankruptcy is staff incompetence.
As to the original question I dont think there is a definitive answer. Both forms can be correct. I would lean toward "one of the reasons" as there are usually several reasons for a bankruptcy. Down turn in sales, poor quality product, inefective marketing, lack of cost control. all these things could be affected by staff incompetence.
I would however not defend this opinion rigorously. As is often the case either form is perfectly understandable to the average person.
Thanks. Dadpad.
I've always thought 'One of the reasons ..."
There is usually more than one reason. I don't understand why there is only one reason and it is divided into parts.
Therefore 'Part of the reason ... ' appears illogical to me.
Regards
dadpad wrote:I think solip may have a point (except that he/she should have refered to an apostrophe). The original sentence should not have used "company's".
This is wrong too. (sorry, dp)
Please ignore.
Hi Mc Tag
It would appear that my question is difficult. I don't understand why.
Will you take Dadpad to court?
My court sits
in camera, that is, the meetings are held in private.
Justice is impartial, and that is why she is shown wearing a blindfold.
Your question is not difficult. Both sentences are acceptable, although of course they mean slightly different things (one of the reasons/ part of the reason)
It's a very picky rule, but one does use the possessive (here marked by the apostrophes in the original sentences) in front of the gerund phrase which is used as a noun.
Someone is teaching very formal written English. If one speaks these sentences, I wouldn't advise using "company's," because it would sound highfalutin' and hokey.
"Hokey"... that's a real book larnin' type of word round your neck of the woods, eh, Miklos?
Hi Contrex and Miklos7
What language are both of you using? I cannot understand what the exchange is about?
Yoong Liat,
Instead of "highfalutin" or "hokey," read "unnecessarily complex." Generally, friendly speech is less formal in structure than written language. Therefore, when you take a really picky form from written language and use it in speaking, you may sound overly formal--a quality that often interferes with effective spoken communication.
Contrex,
Yes, it's strange, but "hokey" is common here--although probably not in Portland, our largest city and a youth magnet. But then a lot of strange vocabulary is in use here in the boondocks. Maine has a older population than most states; therefore, vocabulary of other times can persist.
I was using US vernacular (slang) to mock Miklos' use of the word "hokey", itself a slang word mostly used by US AmE speakers.
Quote:
1. hokey - effusively or insincerely emotional; "a bathetic novel"; "maudlin expressions of sympathy"; "mushy effusiveness"; "a schmaltzy song"; "sentimental soap operas"; "slushy poetry"
kitschy, maudlin, mawkish, schmaltzy, schmalzy, bathetic, sentimental, slushy, soppy, soupy, mushy, drippy
emotional - of more than usual emotion; "his behavior was highly emotional"
2. hokey - artificially formal; "that artificial humility that her husband hated"; "contrived coyness"; "a stilted letter of acknowledgment"; "when people try to correct their speech they develop a stilted pronunciation"
stilted, artificial, contrived
I suspect that Miklos intended to convey the second of these meanings.
On the other hand, we should be allowed the freedom to bloviate now and then.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace