Titre: The Right Word in the Right Place at the Right Time: Wit and Wisdom from the Popular "On Language" Column in The New York Times Magazine
�diteur: Simon & Schuster
Date de parution: 2004
Langue: anglais
ISBN � 10 chiffres: 0743242440
ISBN � 13 chiffres: 9780743242448
Reliure: Hardcover
�tat de l'article: new

A propos de ce titre

Synopsis

Book by Safire William

Extrait

Introduction

We will come to sodomy in a moment. To stagger together through today's column about grammatical possessiveness, you and I must agree on the difference between a gerund and a participle.

Take the word dancing. It starts out as a form of a verb: "Look, Ma, I'm dancing!" When that word is used as an adjective to modify a noun -- "look at that dancing bear!" -- it's called a participle.

But when the same word is used as a noun -- "I see the bear, and its dancing isn't so hot" -- then the word is classified as a gerund. (From the Latin gerundum, rooted in gerere, "to bear, to carry," because the gerund, though a noun, seems to bear the action of a verb.)

We give the same word these different names to tell us what it's doing and what its grammatical needs are. Two great grammarians had a titanic spat in the 1920s over the use of the possessive in this sentence: "Women having the vote reduces men's political power." H. W. Fowler derided what he called "the fused participle" as "grammatically indefensible" and said it should be "Women's having"; Otto Jespersen cited famous usages, urged dropping the possessive and called Fowler a "grammatical moralizer."

Comes now Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia with the latest manifestation of this struggle. An Associated Press account of his stinging dissent in Lawrence v. Texas, in which the Court struck down that state's anti-sodomy law, quoted Scalia out of context as writing, "I have nothing against homosexuals," which seemed condescending. His entire sentence, though, was not: "I have nothing against homosexuals, or any other group, promoting their agenda through normal democratic means."

Note the lack of apostrophes after homosexuals and group to indicate possession; Fowler would have condemned that as a "fused participle." Such loosey-goosey usage from the conservative Scalia, of all people?

"When I composed the passage in question," the justice informs me, "I pondered for some time whether I should be perfectly grammatical and write 'I have nothing against homosexuals', or any other group's, promoting their agenda,' etc. The object of the preposition 'against,' after all, is not 'homosexuals who are promoting,' but rather 'the promoting of (in the sense of by) homosexuals.'

"I have tried to be rigorously consistent in using the possessive before the participle," Scalia notes, "when it is the action, rather than the actor, that is the object of the verb or preposition (or, for that matter, the subject of the sentence)."

But what about his passage in Lawrence, in which he failed to follow Fowler and fused the participle?

"I concluded that because of the intervening phrase 'or any other group,' writing 'homosexuals' " -- with the apostrophe indicating possession -- "(and hence 'any other group's') would violate what is perhaps the first rule of English usage: that no construction should call attention to its own grammatical correctness. Finding no other formulation that could make the point in quite the way I wanted, I decided to be ungrammatical instead of pedantic."

But his attempt to be a regular guy backfired. In a jocular tone, Scalia observes: "God -- whom I believe to be a strict grammarian as well as an Englishman -- has punished me. The misquotation would have been more difficult to engineer had there been an apostrophe after 'homosexuals.' I am convinced that in this instance the AP has been (unwittingly, I am sure) the flagellum Dei to recall me from my populist, illiterate wandering. (You will note that I did not say 'from me wandering.')"

My does beat me before that gerund wandering. Robert Burchfield, editor of the third edition of Fowler's Modern English Usage, writes, "The possessive with gerund is on the retreat, but its use with proper names and personal nouns and pronouns persists in good writing."

Now let's parse Scalia's self-parsing. In his refusal to say "from me wandering," wandering is a gerund. When a personal pronoun comes in front of a gerund, the possessive form is called for: say my, not me. This avoidance of a fused participle makes sense: you say about the above-mentioned bear "I like his dancing," not "I like him dancing," because you want to stress not the bear but his action in prancing about.

In Scalia's dissent in the Texas sodomy case, promoting is a gerund, the object of the preposition against. His strict-construction alternative, using apostrophes to indicate possession -- "against homosexuals', or any other group's, promoting" -- is correct but clunky. He was right to avoid it, and is wrong to castigate himself for eschewing clunkiness.

There would have been another choice, however: put the gerund ahead of the possessors. Try this: "I have nothing against the promoting of their agenda by homosexuals, or by any other group, through normal democratic means." That would not only avoid the confusing apostrophes, but follows "I have nothing against" with its true object, the gerund promoting -- and would make it impossible for any reporter to pull out a condescending "I have nothing against homosexuals."

Regarding your proposed solution to my gerundial problem (to wit, "I have nothing against the promoting of their agenda by homosexuals, or by any other group, through normal democratic means"): It is so obvious that of course I considered it. Two problems. (1) I do not like to have a relative pronoun preceding its antecedent, as in "the promoting of their agenda by homosexuals." (2) More importantly, English remains a language in which emphasis is largely conveyed by word order, and the emphasis in my sentence was upon homosexuals' promoting, not upon (where your alternative places it) the promoting by homosexuals. Surely you can sense the difference.

Justice Antonin Scalia

Supreme Court of the United States

Washington, D.C.

Copyright � 2004 by The Cobbett Corporation

Les informations fournies dans la section � A propos du livre � peuvent faire r�f�rence � une autre �dition de ce titre.

Description de la librairie

We are dedicated to providing customers with easy, flawless transactions and excellent books! We provide 100% customer satisfaction and are always here to answer any questions or concerns for our customers.

Visitez la page d�accueil du vendeur

Informations commerciales relatives au vendeur

Farm For Books Inc
1734 Bellaire Street, Denver, CO, 80220, U.S.A.

Conditions de vente et de livraison

Conditions g�n�rales de vente

We ship from Colorado, U.S.A!

Droit de r�tractation

Si vous �tes un consommateur, vous pouvez exercer votre droit de r�tractation sur le contrat conform�ment � ce qui suit. Le mot � consommateur � d�signe toute personne physique agissant � des fins qui n'entrent pas dans le cadre de son activit� commerciale, artisanale ou professionnelle.

Informations concernant le droit de r�tractation

Droit statutaire de r�tractation

Vous avez le droit d'exercer votre droit de r�tractation sur ce contrat dans les 14 jours sans donner de raison.

Le d�lai de r�tractation expirera au bout de 14 jours � compter du jour o� vous-m�me, ou un tiers autre que le transporteur et d�sign� par vous, prendrez physiquement possession de la derni�re marchandise, du dernier lot ou de la derni�re pi�ce.

Pour exercer votre droit de r�tractation, remplissez �lectroniquement et envoyez une d�claration claire sur notre site Web, sous � Vos achats � dans � Votre compte �. Nous vous communiquerons sans d�lai un accus� de r�ception de cette r�tractation sur un support durable (par exemple, par e-mail).

Pour respecter le d�lai de r�tractation, il vous suffit d'envoyer votre message concernant l'exercice de votre droit de r�tractation avant l'expiration du d�lai de r�tractation.

Effets de la r�tractation

Si vous exercez votre droit de r�tractation sur ce contrat, nous vous rembourserons tous les paiements que vous avez effectu�s, y compris les frais de livraison (� l'exception des frais suppl�mentaires r�sultant du choix d'un mode de livraison autre que le type de livraison standard le moins cher que nous proposons).

Nous pouvons d�duire du remboursement la perte de valeur de toute marchandise livr�e, si la perte est le r�sultat d'une manipulation inutile de votre part.

Nous effectuerons le remboursement dans les meilleurs d�lais, et au plus tard 14 jours apr�s le jour o� nous aurons �t� inform�s de votre d�cision d'exercer votre droit de r�tractation sur ce contrat.

Nous effectuerons le remboursement en utilisant le m�me moyen de paiement que celui que vous avez utilis� pour la transaction initiale, sauf si vous en avez express�ment convenu autrement ; en tout �tat de cause, aucuns frais ne vous seront factur�s � la suite d'un tel remboursement.

Nous pouvons suspendre le remboursement jusqu'� ce que nous ayons re�u les marchandises ou que vous ayez fourni la preuve que vous avez renvoy� les marchandises, en fonction de la premi�re �ventualit�.

Vous devez renvoyer les marchandises ou les remettre � GoldBooks, Comfort, Texas, U.S.A., sans retard injustifi� et, en tout �tat de cause, au plus tard 14 jours � compter du jour o� vous nous avez communiqu� votre d�cision de r�tractation du pr�sent contrat. Le d�lai est respect� si vous renvoyez les marchandises avant l'expiration du d�lai de 14 jours. Vous devrez prendre en charge les frais directs du renvoi des marchandises. Vous n'�tes responsable que de toute diminution de valeur des marchandises r�sultant d'une manipulation autre que celle n�cessaire pour �tablir la nature, les caract�ristiques et le fonctionnement des marchandises.

Exceptions au droit de r�tractation

Le droit de r�tractation ne s'applique pas � ce qui suit :

Distribution de journaux, de revues ou de magazines, � l'exception des contrats d'abonnement ; et
Fourniture d'un contenu num�rique qui n'est pas fourni sur un support mat�riel (par exemple, sur un CD ou un DVD) si vous avez accept�, lors de votre commande, que nous puissions commencer � le livrer et que vous ne puissiez pas exercer votre droit de r�tractation une fois la livraison commenc�e.

Conditions d'exp�dition

Frais d'exp�dition � l'int�rieur de ce pays�: Etats-Unis

Frais d'exp�dition � l'int�rieur de ce pays�: Etats-Unis
Quantit� command�e	4 � 14 jours ouvr�s	3 � 8 jours ouvr�s
Premier article	EUR 4.71	EUR 10.91

Les d�lais de livraison sont fix�s par les vendeurs et varient en fonction du transporteur et du lieu. Les commandes transitant par les douanes peuvent �tre retard�es et les acheteurs sont responsables de tous les droits ou frais associ�s. Les vendeurs peuvent vous contacter au sujet de frais suppl�mentaires afin de couvrir toute augmentation des co�ts d'exp�dition de vos articles.