I keep having problems defining what the antecedent is because the definitions I’m using keep changing. Is it the initial clause in a conditional relationship (forming the premise for a proposition) ‘if X then Y’ type deal, or is it the subject/normative part of a predicated noun. (Subject + verb, minus the object in subject/object type simple sentences.) I’ve got conflicting sources telling me different things. My copy of Webster’s grammar says it functions pronominally, in that it’s the part that the pronouns refer back to, (which would just make it the X of the if X then Y set up) but that doesn’t make sense unless a conditional or a premise can function as a noun (I know you can have extended noun’s ‘like the man’s bike’, or ‘the kid who couldn’t find his shoes’ but can ‘if X then Y’ be a noun if it’s also a function?) The problem then being that if the antecedent is just a noun then it is just a name for the function it preforms and not the function itself (if that makes any sense), I am really, really confused.
I followed the etymology back to an old Latin verb which simply means to surpass, but that doesn’t help much either.
It’s probably something really simple or probably something I missed in High School.
PS Sorry if I’m disturbing you on your Holidays. but it’s bugging the hell out of me.
Hi Timb- you are making this all sound terribly complex. I think it will be better if we sit down together and work through a few simple sentences to show you how an antecedent works. It is not as hard as you think. I will be in on campus this week (not every day)… so you could make an appointment to come and see me some time soon. Be in touch.
MG
Hi Timb- you are making this all sound terribly complex. I think it will be better if we sit down together and work through a few simple sentences to show you how an antecedent works. It is not as hard as you think. I will be in on campus this week (not every day)… so you could make an appointment to come and see me some time soon. Be in touch.
MG
I’m doing a Latin course at Sydney uni this week. But defiantly next week if you’ve got a day free, I would be eternally grateful. (I know how busy you are)
I’m getting confused with a few others things as well, (1) I don’t quite understand how a subjunctive or an injunctive works, I thought I did but that’s not it, also just as important (2) I’m having problems understanding the differences between proper, imperfect and other forms of tense. (3) I don’t understand how a verb is active or passive. I’m having a lot of problems with translations because I don’t understand the difference in English.
I’m sorry, I’m a little all over the place trying to make sense of everything at the moment. I’m trying to get my grammer together before I come back to uni.
I keep having problems defining what the antecedent is because the definitions I’m using keep changing. Is it the initial clause in a conditional relationship (forming the premise for a proposition) ‘if X then Y’ type deal, or is it the subject/normative part of a predicated noun. (Subject + verb, minus the object in subject/object type simple sentences.) I’ve got conflicting sources telling me different things. My copy of Webster’s grammar says it functions pronominally, in that it’s the part that the pronouns refer back to, (which would just make it the X of the if X then Y set up) but that doesn’t make sense unless a conditional or a premise can function as a noun (I know you can have extended noun’s ‘like the man’s bike’, or ‘the kid who couldn’t find his shoes’ but can ‘if X then Y’ be a noun if it’s also a function?) The problem then being that if the antecedent is just a noun then it is just a name for the function it preforms and not the function itself (if that makes any sense), I am really, really confused.
I followed the etymology back to an old Latin verb which simply means to surpass, but that doesn’t help much either.
It’s probably something really simple or probably something I missed in High School.
PS Sorry if I’m disturbing you on your Holidays. but it’s bugging the hell out of me.
Hi Timb- you are making this all sound terribly complex. I think it will be better if we sit down together and work through a few simple sentences to show you how an antecedent works. It is not as hard as you think. I will be in on campus this week (not every day)… so you could make an appointment to come and see me some time soon. Be in touch.
MG
I’m doing a Latin course at Sydney uni this week. But defiantly next week if you’ve got a day free, I would be eternally grateful. (I know how busy you are)
I’m getting confused with a few others things as well, (1) I don’t quite understand how a subjunctive or an injunctive works, I thought I did but that’s not it, also just as important (2) I’m having problems understanding the differences between proper, imperfect and other forms of tense. (3) I don’t understand how a verb is active or passive. I’m having a lot of problems with translations because I don’t understand the difference in English.
I’m sorry, I’m a little all over the place trying to make sense of everything at the moment. I’m trying to get my grammer together before I come back to uni.
I keep having problems defining what the antecedent is because the definitions I’m using keep changing. Is it the initial clause in a conditional relationship (forming the premise for a proposition) ‘if X then Y’ type deal, or is it the subject/normative part of a predicated noun. (Subject + verb, minus the object in subject/object type simple sentences.) I’ve got conflicting sources telling me different things. My copy of Webster’s grammar says it functions pronominally, in that it’s the part that the pronouns refer back to, (which would just make it the X of the if X then Y set up) but that doesn’t make sense unless a conditional or a premise can function as a noun (I know you can have extended noun’s ‘like the man’s bike’, or ‘the kid who couldn’t find his shoes’ but can ‘if X then Y’ be a noun if it’s also a function?) The problem then being that if the antecedent is just a noun then it is just a name for the function it preforms and not the function itself (if that makes any sense), I am really, really confused.
I followed the etymology back to an old Latin verb which simply means to surpass, but that doesn’t help much either.
It’s probably something really simple or probably something I missed in High School.
PS Sorry if I’m disturbing you on your Holidays. but it’s bugging the hell out of me.
Hi Timb- you are making this all sound terribly complex. I think it will be better if we sit down together and work through a few simple sentences to show you how an antecedent works. It is not as hard as you think. I will be in on campus this week (not every day)… so you could make an appointment to come and see me some time soon. Be in touch.
MG
I’m doing a Latin course at Sydney uni this week. But defiantly next week if you’ve got a day free, I would be eternally grateful. (I know how busy you are)
I’m getting confused with a few others things as well, (1) I don’t quite understand how a subjunctive or an injunctive works, I thought I did but that’s not it, also just as important (2) I’m having problems understanding the differences between proper, imperfect and other forms of tense. (3) I don’t understand how a verb is active or passive. I’m having a lot of problems with translations because I don’t understand the difference in English.
I’m sorry, I’m a little all over the place trying to make sense of everything at the moment. I’m trying to get my grammer together before I come back to uni.
I keep having problems defining what the antecedent is because the definitions I’m using keep changing. Is it the initial clause in a conditional relationship (forming the premise for a proposition) ‘if X then Y’ type deal, or is it the subject/normative part of a predicated noun. (Subject + verb, minus the object in subject/object type simple sentences.) I’ve got conflicting sources telling me different things. My copy of Webster’s grammar says it functions pronominally, in that it’s the part that the pronouns refer back to, (which would just make it the X of the if X then Y set up) but that doesn’t make sense unless a conditional or a premise can function as a noun (I know you can have extended noun’s ‘like the man’s bike’, or ‘the kid who couldn’t find his shoes’ but can ‘if X then Y’ be a noun if it’s also a function?) The problem then being that if the antecedent is just a noun then it is just a name for the function it preforms and not the function itself (if that makes any sense), I am really, really confused.
I followed the etymology back to an old Latin verb which simply means to surpass, but that doesn’t help much either.
It’s probably something really simple or probably something I missed in High School.
PS Sorry if I’m disturbing you on your Holidays. but it’s bugging the hell out of me.
Hi Timb- you are making this all sound terribly complex. I think it will be better if we sit down together and work through a few simple sentences to show you how an antecedent works. It is not as hard as you think. I will be in on campus this week (not every day)… so you could make an appointment to come and see me some time soon. Be in touch.
MG
I’m doing a Latin course at Sydney uni this week. But defiantly next week if you’ve got a day free, I would be eternally grateful. (I know how busy you are)
I’m getting confused with a few others things as well, (1) I don’t quite understand how a subjunctive or an injunctive works, I thought I did but that’s not it, also just as important (2) I’m having problems understanding the differences between proper, imperfect and other forms of tense. (3) I don’t understand how a verb is active or passive. I’m having a lot of problems with translations because I don’t understand the difference in English.
I’m sorry, I’m a little all over the place trying to make sense of everything at the moment. I’m trying to get my grammer together before I come back to uni.
I keep having problems defining what the antecedent is because the definitions I’m using keep changing. Is it the initial clause in a conditional relationship (forming the premise for a proposition) ‘if X then Y’ type deal, or is it the subject/normative part of a predicated noun. (Subject + verb, minus the object in subject/object type simple sentences.) I’ve got conflicting sources telling me different things. My copy of Webster’s grammar says it functions pronominally, in that it’s the part that the pronouns refer back to, (which would just make it the X of the if X then Y set up) but that doesn’t make sense unless a conditional or a premise can function as a noun (I know you can have extended noun’s ‘like the man’s bike’, or ‘the kid who couldn’t find his shoes’ but can ‘if X then Y’ be a noun if it’s also a function?) The problem then being that if the antecedent is just a noun then it is just a name for the function it preforms and not the function itself (if that makes any sense), I am really, really confused.
I followed the etymology back to an old Latin verb which simply means to surpass, but that doesn’t help much either.
It’s probably something really simple or probably something I missed in High School.
PS Sorry if I’m disturbing you on your Holidays. but it’s bugging the hell out of me.
I keep having problems defining what the antecedent is because the definitions I’m using keep changing. Is it the initial clause in a conditional relationship (forming the premise for a proposition) ‘if X then Y’ type deal, or is it the subject/normative part of a predicated noun. (Subject + verb, minus the object in subject/object type simple sentences.) I’ve got conflicting sources telling me different things. My copy of Webster’s grammar says it functions pronominally, in that it’s the part that the pronouns refer back to, (which would just make it the X of the if X then Y set up) but that doesn’t make sense unless a conditional or a premise can function as a noun (I know you can have extended noun’s ‘like the man’s bike’, or ‘the kid who couldn’t find his shoes’ but can ‘if X then Y’ be a noun if it’s also a function?) The problem then being that if the antecedent is just a noun then it is just a name for the function it preforms and not the function itself (if that makes any sense), I am really, really confused.
I followed the etymology back to an old Latin verb which simply means to surpass, but that doesn’t help much either.
It’s probably something really simple or probably something I missed in High School.
PS Sorry if I’m disturbing you on your Holidays. but it’s bugging the hell out of me.
Hi Timb- you are making this all sound terribly complex. I think it will be better if we sit down together and work through a few simple sentences to show you how an antecedent works. It is not as hard as you think. I will be in on campus this week (not every day)… so you could make an appointment to come and see me some time soon. Be in touch.
MG
I’m doing a Latin course at Sydney uni this week. But defiantly next week if you’ve got a day free, I would be eternally grateful. (I know how busy you are)
I’m getting confused with a few others things as well, (1) I don’t quite understand how a subjunctive or an injunctive works, I thought I did but that’s not it, also just as important (2) I’m having problems understanding the differences between proper, imperfect and other forms of tense. (3) I don’t understand how a verb is active or passive. I’m having a lot of problems with translations because I don’t understand the difference in English.
I’m sorry, I’m a little all over the place trying to make sense of everything at the moment. I’m trying to get my grammer together before I come back to uni.
Hi Timb- you are making this all sound terribly complex. I think it will be better if we sit down together and work through a few simple sentences to show you how an antecedent works. It is not as hard as you think. I will be in on campus this week (not every day)… so you could make an appointment to come and see me some time soon. Be in touch.
MG
I’m doing a Latin course at Sydney uni this week. But defiantly next week if you’ve got a day free, I would be eternally grateful. (I know how busy you are)
I’m getting confused with a few others things as well, (1) I don’t quite understand how a subjunctive or an injunctive works, I thought I did but that’s not it, also just as important (2) I’m having problems understanding the differences between proper, imperfect and other forms of tense. (3) I don’t understand how a verb is active or passive. I’m having a lot of problems with translations because I don’t understand the difference in English.
I’m sorry, I’m a little all over the place trying to make sense of everything at the moment. I’m trying to get my grammer together before I come back to uni.
Michael Griffith: Home Page- Literature and Life Summer 2023 
Late Xmas present
(I’m not sure where to post this.)
Michael I’m having some problems with Grammar.
I keep having problems defining what the antecedent is because the definitions I’m using keep changing. Is it the initial clause in a conditional relationship (forming the premise for a proposition) ‘if X then Y’ type deal, or is it the subject/normative part of a predicated noun. (Subject + verb, minus the object in subject/object type simple sentences.) I’ve got conflicting sources telling me different things. My copy of Webster’s grammar says it functions pronominally, in that it’s the part that the pronouns refer back to, (which would just make it the X of the if X then Y set up) but that doesn’t make sense unless a conditional or a premise can function as a noun (I know you can have extended noun’s ‘like the man’s bike’, or ‘the kid who couldn’t find his shoes’ but can ‘if X then Y’ be a noun if it’s also a function?) The problem then being that if the antecedent is just a noun then it is just a name for the function it preforms and not the function itself (if that makes any sense), I am really, really confused.
I followed the etymology back to an old Latin verb which simply means to surpass, but that doesn’t help much either.
It’s probably something really simple or probably something I missed in High School.
PS Sorry if I’m disturbing you on your Holidays. but it’s bugging the hell out of me.
Re: Late Xmas present
Hi Timb- you are making this all sound terribly complex. I think it will be better if we sit down together and work through a few simple sentences to show you how an antecedent works. It is not as hard as you think. I will be in on campus this week (not every day)… so you could make an appointment to come and see me some time soon. Be in touch.
MG
Re: Late Xmas present
Hi Timb- you are making this all sound terribly complex. I think it will be better if we sit down together and work through a few simple sentences to show you how an antecedent works. It is not as hard as you think. I will be in on campus this week (not every day)… so you could make an appointment to come and see me some time soon. Be in touch.
MG
Re: Late Xmas present
I’m doing a Latin course at Sydney uni this week. But defiantly next week if you’ve got a day free, I would be eternally grateful. (I know how busy you are)
I’m getting confused with a few others things as well, (1) I don’t quite understand how a subjunctive or an injunctive works, I thought I did but that’s not it, also just as important (2) I’m having problems understanding the differences between proper, imperfect and other forms of tense. (3) I don’t understand how a verb is active or passive. I’m having a lot of problems with translations because I don’t understand the difference in English.
I’m sorry, I’m a little all over the place trying to make sense of everything at the moment. I’m trying to get my grammer together before I come back to uni.
Late Xmas present
(I’m not sure where to post this.)
Michael I’m having some problems with Grammar.
I keep having problems defining what the antecedent is because the definitions I’m using keep changing. Is it the initial clause in a conditional relationship (forming the premise for a proposition) ‘if X then Y’ type deal, or is it the subject/normative part of a predicated noun. (Subject + verb, minus the object in subject/object type simple sentences.) I’ve got conflicting sources telling me different things. My copy of Webster’s grammar says it functions pronominally, in that it’s the part that the pronouns refer back to, (which would just make it the X of the if X then Y set up) but that doesn’t make sense unless a conditional or a premise can function as a noun (I know you can have extended noun’s ‘like the man’s bike’, or ‘the kid who couldn’t find his shoes’ but can ‘if X then Y’ be a noun if it’s also a function?) The problem then being that if the antecedent is just a noun then it is just a name for the function it preforms and not the function itself (if that makes any sense), I am really, really confused.
I followed the etymology back to an old Latin verb which simply means to surpass, but that doesn’t help much either.
It’s probably something really simple or probably something I missed in High School.
PS Sorry if I’m disturbing you on your Holidays. but it’s bugging the hell out of me.
Re: Late Xmas present
Hi Timb- you are making this all sound terribly complex. I think it will be better if we sit down together and work through a few simple sentences to show you how an antecedent works. It is not as hard as you think. I will be in on campus this week (not every day)… so you could make an appointment to come and see me some time soon. Be in touch.
MG
Re: Late Xmas present
I’m doing a Latin course at Sydney uni this week. But defiantly next week if you’ve got a day free, I would be eternally grateful. (I know how busy you are)
I’m getting confused with a few others things as well, (1) I don’t quite understand how a subjunctive or an injunctive works, I thought I did but that’s not it, also just as important (2) I’m having problems understanding the differences between proper, imperfect and other forms of tense. (3) I don’t understand how a verb is active or passive. I’m having a lot of problems with translations because I don’t understand the difference in English.
I’m sorry, I’m a little all over the place trying to make sense of everything at the moment. I’m trying to get my grammer together before I come back to uni.
Late Xmas present
(I’m not sure where to post this.)
Michael I’m having some problems with Grammar.
I keep having problems defining what the antecedent is because the definitions I’m using keep changing. Is it the initial clause in a conditional relationship (forming the premise for a proposition) ‘if X then Y’ type deal, or is it the subject/normative part of a predicated noun. (Subject + verb, minus the object in subject/object type simple sentences.) I’ve got conflicting sources telling me different things. My copy of Webster’s grammar says it functions pronominally, in that it’s the part that the pronouns refer back to, (which would just make it the X of the if X then Y set up) but that doesn’t make sense unless a conditional or a premise can function as a noun (I know you can have extended noun’s ‘like the man’s bike’, or ‘the kid who couldn’t find his shoes’ but can ‘if X then Y’ be a noun if it’s also a function?) The problem then being that if the antecedent is just a noun then it is just a name for the function it preforms and not the function itself (if that makes any sense), I am really, really confused.
I followed the etymology back to an old Latin verb which simply means to surpass, but that doesn’t help much either.
It’s probably something really simple or probably something I missed in High School.
PS Sorry if I’m disturbing you on your Holidays. but it’s bugging the hell out of me.
Re: Late Xmas present
Hi Timb- you are making this all sound terribly complex. I think it will be better if we sit down together and work through a few simple sentences to show you how an antecedent works. It is not as hard as you think. I will be in on campus this week (not every day)… so you could make an appointment to come and see me some time soon. Be in touch.
MG
Re: Late Xmas present
I’m doing a Latin course at Sydney uni this week. But defiantly next week if you’ve got a day free, I would be eternally grateful. (I know how busy you are)
I’m getting confused with a few others things as well, (1) I don’t quite understand how a subjunctive or an injunctive works, I thought I did but that’s not it, also just as important (2) I’m having problems understanding the differences between proper, imperfect and other forms of tense. (3) I don’t understand how a verb is active or passive. I’m having a lot of problems with translations because I don’t understand the difference in English.
I’m sorry, I’m a little all over the place trying to make sense of everything at the moment. I’m trying to get my grammer together before I come back to uni.
Late Xmas present
(I’m not sure where to post this.)
Michael I’m having some problems with Grammar.
I keep having problems defining what the antecedent is because the definitions I’m using keep changing. Is it the initial clause in a conditional relationship (forming the premise for a proposition) ‘if X then Y’ type deal, or is it the subject/normative part of a predicated noun. (Subject + verb, minus the object in subject/object type simple sentences.) I’ve got conflicting sources telling me different things. My copy of Webster’s grammar says it functions pronominally, in that it’s the part that the pronouns refer back to, (which would just make it the X of the if X then Y set up) but that doesn’t make sense unless a conditional or a premise can function as a noun (I know you can have extended noun’s ‘like the man’s bike’, or ‘the kid who couldn’t find his shoes’ but can ‘if X then Y’ be a noun if it’s also a function?) The problem then being that if the antecedent is just a noun then it is just a name for the function it preforms and not the function itself (if that makes any sense), I am really, really confused.
I followed the etymology back to an old Latin verb which simply means to surpass, but that doesn’t help much either.
It’s probably something really simple or probably something I missed in High School.
PS Sorry if I’m disturbing you on your Holidays. but it’s bugging the hell out of me.
Re: Late Xmas present
Hi Timb- you are making this all sound terribly complex. I think it will be better if we sit down together and work through a few simple sentences to show you how an antecedent works. It is not as hard as you think. I will be in on campus this week (not every day)… so you could make an appointment to come and see me some time soon. Be in touch.
MG
Re: Late Xmas present
I’m doing a Latin course at Sydney uni this week. But defiantly next week if you’ve got a day free, I would be eternally grateful. (I know how busy you are)
I’m getting confused with a few others things as well, (1) I don’t quite understand how a subjunctive or an injunctive works, I thought I did but that’s not it, also just as important (2) I’m having problems understanding the differences between proper, imperfect and other forms of tense. (3) I don’t understand how a verb is active or passive. I’m having a lot of problems with translations because I don’t understand the difference in English.
I’m sorry, I’m a little all over the place trying to make sense of everything at the moment. I’m trying to get my grammer together before I come back to uni.
Late Xmas present
(I’m not sure where to post this.)
Michael I’m having some problems with Grammar.
I keep having problems defining what the antecedent is because the definitions I’m using keep changing. Is it the initial clause in a conditional relationship (forming the premise for a proposition) ‘if X then Y’ type deal, or is it the subject/normative part of a predicated noun. (Subject + verb, minus the object in subject/object type simple sentences.) I’ve got conflicting sources telling me different things. My copy of Webster’s grammar says it functions pronominally, in that it’s the part that the pronouns refer back to, (which would just make it the X of the if X then Y set up) but that doesn’t make sense unless a conditional or a premise can function as a noun (I know you can have extended noun’s ‘like the man’s bike’, or ‘the kid who couldn’t find his shoes’ but can ‘if X then Y’ be a noun if it’s also a function?) The problem then being that if the antecedent is just a noun then it is just a name for the function it preforms and not the function itself (if that makes any sense), I am really, really confused.
I followed the etymology back to an old Latin verb which simply means to surpass, but that doesn’t help much either.
It’s probably something really simple or probably something I missed in High School.
PS Sorry if I’m disturbing you on your Holidays. but it’s bugging the hell out of me.
Late Xmas present
(I’m not sure where to post this.)
Michael I’m having some problems with Grammar.
I keep having problems defining what the antecedent is because the definitions I’m using keep changing. Is it the initial clause in a conditional relationship (forming the premise for a proposition) ‘if X then Y’ type deal, or is it the subject/normative part of a predicated noun. (Subject + verb, minus the object in subject/object type simple sentences.) I’ve got conflicting sources telling me different things. My copy of Webster’s grammar says it functions pronominally, in that it’s the part that the pronouns refer back to, (which would just make it the X of the if X then Y set up) but that doesn’t make sense unless a conditional or a premise can function as a noun (I know you can have extended noun’s ‘like the man’s bike’, or ‘the kid who couldn’t find his shoes’ but can ‘if X then Y’ be a noun if it’s also a function?) The problem then being that if the antecedent is just a noun then it is just a name for the function it preforms and not the function itself (if that makes any sense), I am really, really confused.
I followed the etymology back to an old Latin verb which simply means to surpass, but that doesn’t help much either.
It’s probably something really simple or probably something I missed in High School.
PS Sorry if I’m disturbing you on your Holidays. but it’s bugging the hell out of me.
Re: Late Xmas present
Hi Timb- you are making this all sound terribly complex. I think it will be better if we sit down together and work through a few simple sentences to show you how an antecedent works. It is not as hard as you think. I will be in on campus this week (not every day)… so you could make an appointment to come and see me some time soon. Be in touch.
MG
Re: Late Xmas present
I’m doing a Latin course at Sydney uni this week. But defiantly next week if you’ve got a day free, I would be eternally grateful. (I know how busy you are)
I’m getting confused with a few others things as well, (1) I don’t quite understand how a subjunctive or an injunctive works, I thought I did but that’s not it, also just as important (2) I’m having problems understanding the differences between proper, imperfect and other forms of tense. (3) I don’t understand how a verb is active or passive. I’m having a lot of problems with translations because I don’t understand the difference in English.
I’m sorry, I’m a little all over the place trying to make sense of everything at the moment. I’m trying to get my grammer together before I come back to uni.
Re: Late Xmas present
Hi Timb- you are making this all sound terribly complex. I think it will be better if we sit down together and work through a few simple sentences to show you how an antecedent works. It is not as hard as you think. I will be in on campus this week (not every day)… so you could make an appointment to come and see me some time soon. Be in touch.
MG
Re: Late Xmas present
I’m doing a Latin course at Sydney uni this week. But defiantly next week if you’ve got a day free, I would be eternally grateful. (I know how busy you are)
I’m getting confused with a few others things as well, (1) I don’t quite understand how a subjunctive or an injunctive works, I thought I did but that’s not it, also just as important (2) I’m having problems understanding the differences between proper, imperfect and other forms of tense. (3) I don’t understand how a verb is active or passive. I’m having a lot of problems with translations because I don’t understand the difference in English.
I’m sorry, I’m a little all over the place trying to make sense of everything at the moment. I’m trying to get my grammer together before I come back to uni.