I hope you told your students to put shock and awe in quotation marks, then.
They’re both correct grammar. One is just more likely to occur than the other.
Yes, say enything wut we want, not follow no dumb rulez us! Of order words, form words matter no! It because sense to make but follow you thing want! Old men, dumb, not have me no tell rite. Old man shutup, rulz grammer, stoopid.
Actually this is the most severe type of grammar error, one of syntax.
Which of these sentences is more incorrect:
Correct version: Bobby and I played tennis.
Bobby I and tennis played.
Bobby and me played tennis.
If the words are changed in order is usually by far the most severe error you can make in English because there is usually a dramatic change in intended meaning:
Take one pill twice a day.
Take two pills once a day.
The man killed Bobby.
Bobby killed the man.
An idiot is you.
Diagram that.
No I agree with you, I was pointing out that flipping led to the wrong conclusion by chance, and that if flipping does happen to work, that’s not a rule.
“The man killed Bobby” and “Bobby killed the man” are syntactically identical in regard to ‘killed’. More simply put, “Bobby killed Tommy” and “Tommy killed Bobby” are syntactically identical in all regards. Grammar defines the structure of communication, not it’s content.
Are you saying meaning and syntax are not in the same field as grammar?
Show me a system of editorial grammar marks that doesn’t include “word choice” or “word order” in some form or another.
Typical word choice error:
He wrote the picture. He drew the essay.
Typical word order error:
He threw the ball up. (towards the ceiling)
He threw up the ball. (He shouldn’t have swallowed it.)
If successful communication isn’t the main goal of grammar, then what is?
My god, there are so many unrelated topics and tangents to the OP that are brought up here–grammatical redundancy, double transformation, aspect (the come/go question) and on and on… I can hardly catalog them.
But I can offer, for what it’s worth, a professional linguist’s attempt at explanation or summary of any particular, defined issue someone wants to discuss.
Not saying I know everything, so please don’t attack me, but I do carry information about many of the issues above.
Which one is wrong? They’re both perfectly good sentences. He might have done either one of those things. Syntax describes the structure of sentences. The content of the sentence is totally irrelevant. You are talking about whether a statement is true or not. That has nothing to do with grammar. Look up logic or philosophy for that.
It’s comes, not come (subject-object clausal agreement).
Let’s write it another way to make it clearer:
Your (‘new’ is tautology and therefore redundant) promotion brings with it…
You don’t say, “Your promotion bring with it…” do you?
And besides, the opening sentence (“With your new promotion comes new challenges and responsibilities.”) is incorrect anyway, as you don’t begin a sentence with a preposition - it should read: “Your promotion brings with it new challenges and responsibilities.”
Uh, you’ve just changed the verb from “come” to “bring,” thereby changing (actually reversing) the subject-verb-object relationship. The promotion does the bringing, but the challenges and responsibilities do the coming.
Maybe you don’t but there’s no reason not to.
It’s easiest to identify agreement errors and so forth when looking at a standard SVO sentence. They’re not flipping it for shits and giggles. They’re undoing the inversion created by the writer when he put the sentence together in the first place.
And that changes the fact that the initial sentences were both wrong, how, precisely?
No, not all.
You place “all” the burden on the receiver. No way. What also matters is that the person who’s trying to communicate something can make himself understood.
No, you’ve changed it to a completely different sentence with a different subject. It simply doesn’t apply.
Wrong.
Irrelevant.
Wrong.
Wrong.
That’s a completely different sentence.
You fail my English class.
Three pages of this?
“Challenges and responsibilities” is the subject of the sentence. They are what is coming.
“With your new promotion” is the object.
The verb matches the subject. A challenge comes; challenges come (or challenges and responsibilities come).
“Come” is correct.
What I think is confusing some people is how easily the sentence can be rewritten. You can easily rewrite it so promotion is the subject and challenges and responsibilities are the object. In that case, comes would be the correct verb. I think some people did this without realizing it.
You new promotion comes with new challenges and responsibilities.
With new challenges and responsibilities, comes your new promotion.
Just focus on the “with” - that indicates the object. Then the subject is the other one.
They weren’t both wrong, just one of them. “Come” was correct. The subject of the verb was “new challenges and responsibilities,” which is plural, so the verb is in the third person plural. “Your new job” is the object of the preposition “with.” With your new job come new challenges and responsibilities.
And I’m supposed to take anyone who communicates largely in monosyllabics seriously?
I doubt you could run an English class.
Monosyllables, not monosyllabics.