The subject of "recover" is "which"?

Forums: English, Esl, Grammar
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Logically speaking, the subject of the verb "recover " is "which". But it looks like "mammals" is the subject.

Can you catch the subject of the verb "recover " in the first glance?

Context:

The study was conducted using salamanders which unlike mammals recover fully from a Parkinson's-like condition within a four-week period. Parkinson's disease is a neurodegenerative disease characterised by the death of dopamine-producing cells in the mid-brain. As the salamander re-builds all lost dopamine-producing neurons, the researchers examined how the salamander brain detects the absence of these cells. This question is a fundamental one since it has not been known what causes the new formation of nerve cells and why the process ceases when the correct number have been made.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 1,148 • Replies: 16

No top replies

. . . salamanders recover, unlike mammals . . .

"Which" is only referentially the subject, and it refers to salamanders, which are the subjects of the sentence.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

. . . salamanders recover, unlike mammals . . .

"Which" is only referentially the subject, and it refers to salamanders, which are the subjects of the sentence.

Thank you Set.

Have you got the subject without the slightest trace of hesitation or doubt?

1 Reply

@oristarA,

Yes, and i spotted it right away.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

Cool.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

The study was conducted using salamanders which unlike mammals recover fully from a Parkinson's-like condition within a four-week period.

Quote:

Set wrote:
. . . salamanders recover, unlike mammals . . .

"Which" is only referentially the subject, and it refers to salamanders, which are the subjects of the sentence.

Quote:

Oristar asked: Have you got the subject without the slightest trace of hesitation or doubt?

Quote:

Set replied: Yes, and i spotted it right away.

The subject is not 'salamanders'. The subject is 'study'.

1 Reply

@JTT,

Awry smile.

0 Replies

I'm glad for once that i saw laughoutloud's post, and bothered to read one by JTT. As was always the case years ago when i read posts by that idiot, he's full of ****.

The study was conducted using salamanders which unlike mammals recover . . .

The study doesn't recover, the salamanders recover--the simple fact that the verb form is plural should have tipped everybody off. But JTT is a loud-mouthed, bullying, know-nothing idiot, so i'm not surpriesd that he makes such a basic, stupid mistake, and takes the opportunity to try to play the expert.

X--the unknown quality. Spurt--a drip under pressure. That's JTT.

2 Replies

Oristar, i don't want you getting bogus information from that phony JTT. "Study" is the subject of "was conducted." But you didn't ask that. You asked for the subject of "recover." That's in the third person, and in the third person, present indicative, recovers is singular, and recover is plural. The subject of "recover" is "salamanders."

1 Reply

@Setanta,

To be frank :

Setanta's RIGHT here. Thank you Set.

But I have to point out the fact that JTT has ALWAYS given me EXCELLENT replies. It seems to me that someone has used or stolen JTT's account to make the odd reply in this thread.

0 Replies

You may be correct--i've not read more than three or four of JTT's posts in the last two years. This one, however, is an egregious example of giving the wrong answer, and i suspect it was motivated by it's obsession with making hateful remarks about me. It is for exactly that reason that i stopped reading it's crap, and almost never read the drivel it produces.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Quote:

I'm glad for once that i saw laughoutloud's post, and bothered to read one by JTT.

A likely story. There was nothing in Laughoutlood's post that would cause you to read my post. You are always ready with a lie to cover your butt, aren't you, pathfinder?

Original sentence: The study was conducted using salamanders which unlike mammals recover fully from a Parkinson's-like condition within a four-week period.

Quote:

Set wrote: "Which" is only referentially the subject, and it refers to salamanders, which are the subjects of the sentence.

The study was conducted using salamanders which unlike mammals recover . . .

Quote:

Setanta argues: The study doesn't recover, the salamanders recover--the simple fact that the verb form is plural should have tipped everybody off.

Of course, the 'study' doesn't recover but that isn't at all germane to the issue at hand.

What is germane is that you stated, [above, put in red] that "salamanders ... are the subjects of the sentence", which is, of course, false.

The subject of the sentence is 'study'. The subject of the relative clause
is 'which'. The antecedent for that relative pronoun is 'salamanders' but that word never appears as the subject in the original sentence.

The study was conducted using salamanders.

Are you trying to tell us that 'salamanders' is the subject here? If not here, where in the sentence is 'salamanders' being used as the subject of a sentence?

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

and i suspect it was motivated by it's[sic] obsession with making hateful remarks about me. It is for exactly that reason that i stopped reading it's[sic] crap, and almost never read the drivel it produces.

Why does the word 'hypocrite' spring to mind?

0 Replies

@Setanta,

No hateful remarks in this thread right up until this post of yours, Set. Then at least four hateful comments from you. Does it surprise you when people tell you that you really are a hypocrite?

You're probably gonna be hard pressed to find any hateful comments in the remainder of my posts - certainly some truthful ones that will, no doubt, stick in your craw - but when you don't have anything sensible to say, this is pretty much always your first line of defence, attack attack attack.

Since you don't want Oristar to be misled, then you should address the language issue, not go off on tangential posts about how badly you've been treated over the years.

If you are able to show me that I'm mistaken, I will have no problem admitting I was wrong.

0 Replies

I don't want to see you two submerging yourselves in bitter argument or even in resentfulness against each other.

Language isn't everything. Time, energy, health etc. also count. I've found so merits in both of you. No one's perfect. In communicating in cyberspace or in reality, nitpicking someone's fault while ignoring his/her merit means forsaking what is important to pursue what is petty. What good does that have?

Thank you for reading this.

1 Reply

@oristarA,

Quote:

What good does that have?

It provides a drollery so exquisite that I too am glad that Setanta read my post to discover JTT's expose.

Speaking of nitpicking; your posts invite it.

Perhaps you could contemplate a rewrite of your previous post to improve the grammar and eliminate the tautology.

Quote:

I don't want to see you two submerging yourselves in bitter argument or even in resentfulness against each other.

I don't want to see you immersed in bitter argument and resentfulness.

Quote:

I've found so merits in both of you

some considerable?

Quote:

What good does that have?

What good is that/ What good does that do?

If all capitals is shouting then is big font bold merely raising one's voice?

1 Reply

@laughoutlood,

Thanks.

"So many merits..."

0 Replies

The subject of "recover" is "which"?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know