tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5957711516423189280.post5943426216219701977..comments2023-05-06T01:52:27.335-07:00Comments on The Sentence Sleuth: Poll Results 164The Sentence Sleuthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09253486236870691918noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5957711516423189280.post-78748596037972755632012-01-29T08:35:42.576-08:002012-01-29T08:35:42.576-08:00My apologies for not putting the sentence in conte...My apologies for not putting the sentence in context, which did make it clear that "him" referred to the defendant. <br /><br />The potential problem I thought blog readers would pick up on was the verb "sit." I have heard some people from the South use "set" in this case. <br /><br />Anyone have any thoughts on "sit" vs. "set"?The Sentence Sleuthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09253486236870691918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5957711516423189280.post-38416073558383731702012-01-27T22:47:25.026-08:002012-01-27T22:47:25.026-08:00The problem is using a pronoun - "him" -...The problem is using a pronoun - "him" - without an antecedent. It's not clear in the sentence who the guards are sitting down.Bob Kinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16468213740097363600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5957711516423189280.post-31566478757620645472012-01-18T04:45:05.357-08:002012-01-18T04:45:05.357-08:00You indicated that nothing was wrong with this sen...You indicated that nothing was wrong with this sentence: "The judge motioned for the guards to sit him back down."<br /><br />There is a LOT wrong with this sentence. The sentence is written as if the antecedent for the pronoun "him" should be "guards", in which case the author has forgotten agreement between a plural antecendent and a singular pronoun. Looking further back in the sentence for an antecedent, gives us "judge", which would imply that the judge is ordering the guards to force himself to sit. This is proposterous for logical reasons having nothing to do with grammar.<br /><br />So we are left with the implication that there is an antecedent further back in a missing sentence and the judge is actually requiring the guards to seat some unruly spectator, defendent or lawyer. Or perhaps the guards had previously forced someone to stand and the judge is now requiring them to allow the poor tired soul to retake his seat.gclasonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15765064106499538479noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5957711516423189280.post-78571390110064533542012-01-04T05:05:44.232-08:002012-01-04T05:05:44.232-08:00Maybe because the sentence is out of context, but ...Maybe because the sentence is out of context, but it sounds like the antecedent of him is the judge.ChildsPlayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05207706323200724033noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5957711516423189280.post-51177582765985624782012-01-03T23:36:05.415-08:002012-01-03T23:36:05.415-08:00This sentence has been bugging me all day.. thanks...This sentence has been bugging me all day.. thanks!<br /><br />I worked out why it was bugging me.. It's the "him" that is the problem.. It could refer to the judge, or the defendant.. <br /><br />Here is my attempt at a much better sentence.. <br /><br />"The judge motioned to the guards to sit the defendant back down".Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10570195387849213678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5957711516423189280.post-59914061134767719842012-01-03T15:21:03.164-08:002012-01-03T15:21:03.164-08:00I'm struggling to come up with a better senten...I'm struggling to come up with a better sentence, do you have a suggestion?Duncanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10570195387849213678noreply@blogger.com