Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Agreement between pronoun (or corresponding possessive adjective) and antecedent also requires the selection of the correct person. For example, if the antecedent is the first person noun phrase Mary and I , then a first person pronoun ( we/us/our ) is required; however, most noun phrases ( the dog , my cats , Jack and Jill , etc.) are third ...
Assumpsit ("he has undertaken", from Latin, assumere), [1] or more fully, action in assumpsit, was a form of action at common law used to enforce what are now called obligations arising in tort and contract; and in some common law jurisdictions, unjust enrichment.
Likewise, if the antecedent is more than one thing, again either specific or generic, the pronoun they is used to refer back to it, and again no difficulty arises. When the antecedent is a specific person (whose gender is therefore known), the correct referring pronoun is either he or she, depending on the person's
Almost any syntactic category can serve as the antecedent to a pro-form. The following examples illustrate a range of proforms and their antecedents. The pro-forms are in bold, and their antecedents are underlined: a. Willy said he likes chocolate. - Noun as antecedent b. My eccentric uncle likes chocolate. He tells everyone to buy him chocolate.
The last antecedent rule is a controversial rule for interpreting statutes and contracts. The rule is that "Referential and qualifying phrases, where no contrary intention appears, refer solely to the last antecedent." [1] There are examples of judges both applying and rejecting use of the rule under similar facts. [2]
Here "What he did" has the same sense as "the things that he did", or "the thing that he did". Thus the noun phrase the thing and the relative pronoun that are 'fused' into what; and the resulting relative construction "What he did" functions as the subject of the verb was. Free relative constructions are inherently restrictive.
The quantificational antecedent ‘every female pilot’ is embedded in the relative clause which modifying the subject of the matrix clause ‘the man,’ while pronoun ‘she’ is located in the matrix clause, so the quantificational antecedent does not have a c-commanding relationship with the pronoun, and BVA is not satisfied.
The other editor is free to pursue the options offered at WP:Dispute resolution requests. If an editor withdraws without comment the other editor should, before assuming consent, {{ ping }} the silent editor and alert them that their silence will be construed as agreement.