Hi, ALL!

I am reading now a glittering, reputable National Geographic
magazine ("100 greatest mysteries revealed"), and in the article
about King Arthur I read:

-----Beginning of the citation-----
Historical opinion is now split. Some scholars think
that the lack of contemporary accounts of Arthur mean
he is a later invention.
----- The end of the citation -----

1. What about the absence of article before "Historical opinion"?
2. why do they write "mean" instead of "means"?

IMHO the lack of ... means...

Bye, ALL!
Alexander Koryagin

---
* Origin: nntps://fidonews.mine.nu - Lake Ylo - Finland (2:221/6.0)

Hi! Alexander,

On 05/02/2019 06:40 PM, you wrote to All:

Historical opinion is now split. Some scholars think
that the lack of contemporary accounts of Arthur mean
he is a later invention.

1. What about the absence of article before "Historical opinion"?

There are many opinions. I have mine. Do you have one?

2. why do they write "mean" instead of "means"?

IMHO the lack of ... means...

It simply implies 'it suggests', i.e. "...of Arthur suggest he is a later...". Even 'implies' could have been substituted for 'means'.

An aside comment...

I will leave you with this teaser video on EwwTuub... The Sword Excalibur - The Truth Behind [National Geographic on Nov 17, 2011]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAqb8XHGezI

I have seen another full-length video many years ago showing the entire process, which formed my opinion on the probable basis (and time in history) for the Arthurian tale. In those times, the making of swords was wizard's work. 8-)

There is an English phrase you may or may not have stumbled across: Great Minds Think Alike (sometimes abbreviated to GMTA). I was recently doing some haphazard research on Arthur and Excalibur. GMTA, Alexander.

Cheers,
Paul.

--- Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
* Origin: Are Filipino contortionists manila folders? (3:640/1384.125)

-----Beginning of the citation-----
Historical opinion is now split. Some scholars think
that the lack of contemporary accounts of Arthur mean
he is a later invention.
----- The end of the citation -----
1. What about the absence of article before "Historical opinion"?
2. why do they write "mean" instead of "means"?

Not sure on #1. However, #2 I believe is because "mean" is the plural
form, in this case "lack of accounts mean." Accounts is plural, so mean is also plural. If the sentence said "lack of a contemporary account," the
writer would have used "means" instead as account is singular.

At least that is how I was taught it. :)

Mike

---
þ SLMR 2.1a þ Veni, Vidi, Visa. (I came, I saw, I charged it.)
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

Hi, Mike Powell!
I read your message from 03.05.2019 02:26

-----Beginning of the citation-----

Historical opinion is now split. Some scholars think that the lack
of contemporary accounts of Arthur mean he is a later invention.

----- The end of the citation -----

1. What about the absence of article before "Historical opinion"?
2. why do they write "mean" instead of "means"?

Not sure on #1. However, #2 I believe is because "mean" is the
plural form, in this case "lack of accounts mean." Accounts is
plural, so mean is also plural. If the sentence said "lack of a contemporary account," the writer would have used "means" instead
as account is singular.

At least that is how I was taught it.

In Longman dictionary I found out "lack" can be used in both forms.

[The lack of oxygen at this height saps power.]
"saps" is related to "lack" and oxygen doesn't make "lack" uncountable.

or an uncountable form:

[Their apparent lack of progress mean they are not doing their job properly.]

Bye, Mike!
Alexander Koryagin
english_tutor 2019

---
* Origin: nntps://fidonews.mine.nu - Lake Ylo - Finland (2:221/6.0)

Hi! Alexander,

On 03 May 19 11:54, you wrote to Mike Powell:

[The lack of oxygen at this height saps power.]
"saps" is related to "lack" and oxygen doesn't make "lack"
uncountable.

IMHO: saps is related to power. Power is the thing being sapped by a lack of oxygen.

or an uncountable form:

[Their apparent lack of progress mean they are not doing their job properly.]

IMHO: this is unnatural to a native speaker. (I don't know where Mike got his rule from, although it may be correct for 99.99% of cases in his locale.) The passage should read: "...lack of progress means they are not...". It could be countable, in either the case of there being many (persons) involved, or in the singular case of one person, when speaking of 'their'. English can be annoyingly imprecise at times. 8-)

Cheers,
Paul.

... finer temptress, Through the ages she's heading west,
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20130515
* Origin: Quinn's Rock - Live from Paul's Xubuntu desktop! (3:640/1384)

Hi, Paul Quinn!
I read your message from 03.05.2019 13:48

[The lack of oxygen at this height saps power.] "saps" is related
to "lack" and oxygen doesn't make "lack" uncountable.

IMHO: saps is related to power. Power is the thing being sapped by
a lack of oxygen.

But "lack" is the subject, and "saps" is the predicate to "lack"

or an uncountable form:

[Their apparent lack of progress mean they are not doing their job
properly.]

IMHO: this is unnatural to a native speaker.

Yes, you are right it was my fault. That example from the dictionary was in the form of a question (Does their apparent lack of progress mean...) and I remade it wrongly.

So, "Their apparent lack of progress MEANS they are not doing their job properly." -- here we have "lack" uncountable.

[a lack of food]
here we use "lack" as singular noun.

(I don't know where
Mike got his rule from, although it may be correct for 99.99% of
cases in his locale.) The passage should read: "... lack of
progress means they are not...".

If we apply Mike's rule we'll see that "progress" is an uncountable noun, as should be "lack", and, therefore, it should be "lack of progress MEAN they are not..." So the rule is not working.

It could be countable, in either
the case of there being many (persons) involved, or in the singular
case of one person, when speaking of 'their'. English can be
annoyingly imprecise at times.

Bye, Paul!
Alexander Koryagin
english_tutor 2019

---
* Origin: nntps://fidonews.mine.nu - Lake Ylo - Finland (2:221/6.0)

Hi! Alexander,

On 03 May 19 21:39, you wrote to me:

But "lack" is the subject, and "saps" is the predicate to "lack"

I am out of my depth here.[gulp] I withdraw.

So, "Their apparent lack of progress MEANS they are not doing their
job properly." -- here we have "lack" uncountable.

Yes. (I'll play a visual pun at this point and transverse an 's'...) They're a _slack_ mob for not working hard enough.[weak grin]

[a lack of food]
here we use "lack" as singular noun.

Okay. What fun. :)

Cheers,
Paul.

... What happens if you get scared half to death, twice?
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20130515
* Origin: Quinn's Rock - Live from Paul's Xubuntu desktop! (3:640/1384)

IMHO: this is unnatural to a native speaker. (I don't know where Mike got his >rule from, although it may be correct for 99.99% of cases in his locale.) The >passage should read: "...lack of progress means they are not...". It could be >countable, in either the case of there being many (persons) involved, or in the
singular case of one person, when speaking of 'their'. English can be >annoyingly imprecise at times. 8-)

That is how I would also say it, as lack is singular. :)

Mike

---
þ SLMR 2.1a þ My wife made me join a bridge club...I jump next week.
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

If we apply Mike's rule we'll see that "progress" is an uncountable noun, as >should be "lack", and, therefore, it should be "lack of progress MEAN they are >not..." So the rule is not working.

No, it would be lack and means. I may be using "singular" and
"uncountable" interchangably (and incorrectly!), but I would use MEANS in
your example also.

Mike

---
þ SLMR 2.1a þ True Multitasking = 3 PCs and a chair with wheels!
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

Hi! Mike,

On 05/04/2019 10:03 AM, you wrote:

English can be annoyingly imprecise at times. 8-)

That is how I would also say it, as lack is singular. :)

OTOH, English lacks some 'super powers' that are inherent in other languages. E.g. a plural form of 'their' separate from a singular form.

;)

Cheers,
Paul.

--- Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
* Origin: Deja Booboo: The feeling you've screwed this up before. (3:640/1384.125)

Hi, Mike Powell!
I read your message from 04.05.2019 03:05

If we apply Mike's rule we'll see that "progress" is an
uncountable noun, as should be "lack", and, therefore, it should
be "lack of progress MEAN they are not..." So the rule is not
working.

No, it would be lack and means. I may be using "singular"
and "uncountable" interchangably (and incorrectly!), but I would
use MEANS in your example also.

I understood where I had misunderstood. I thought that I should use the verb form like "meanS" only with countable nouns. For instance, I thought that

Water erode rock.

but in reality

"Water erodes rock."

;-) Well, poor practice.

Bye, Mike!
Alexander Koryagin
english_tutor 2019

---
* Origin: nntps://fidonews.mine.nu - Lake Ylo - Finland (2:221/6.0)

Water erode rock.

but in reality

"Water erodes rock."

That sounds correct. :)

Take Care!
Mike

---
þ SLMR 2.1a þ Come on you stranger, you legend, you martyr, and shine!!
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

Hi, Alexander! Recently you wrote in a message to All:

-----Beginning of the citation-----
Historical opinion is now split. Some scholars think
that the lack of contemporary accounts of Arthur mean
he is a later invention.
----- The end of the citation -----

1. What about the absence of article before "Historical
opinion"?

I've seen both "public opinion" and "scientific opinion" elsewhere, without articles, so this usage makes sense to me.

2. why do they write "mean" instead of "means"?

In brief, I reckon somebody goofed.... :-Q

IMHO the lack of ... means...

Agreed. The bare subject is "lack", the bare predicate is "means". OTOH the plural "accounts"... while it may lead native speakers astray because it's +\- the last thing they noticed before the verb... is irrelevant to folks who can recognize a prepositional phrase as descriptive material which doesn't enter into the equation regardless of whether or not xxx is countable.... :-)




--- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+
* Origin: Wits' End, Vancouver CANADA (1:153/716)

Hi, Mike! Recently you wrote in a message to ALEXANDER KORYAGIN:

I may be using "singular" and "uncountable" interchangably
(and incorrectly!), but I would use MEANS in your example
also.

IMHO your usage is correct, although you're not sure how to explain it. Maybe I can help a bit re the latter.... :-)



The term "singular" is used with reference to a noun indicating the name of a single person, place, thing, idea, organization, or event:


My friend Mary enjoys horseback riding.

Vancouver, BC is located near the Pacific Ocean.

I have an eraser on my desk.

Love makes the world go 'round.

The city council wants to install more bike lanes.

Our folk music festival takes place annually at Jericho Park.



As a native speaker, you may not have heard the terms "countable" & "uncountable" in school. I think I probably learned them from Alexander. But you may recall being taught about stuff which is usually measured by weight or by volume... e.g. various liquids, meat/fish/poultry, cheese, and salt because it's okay to say "less" whereas with countable objects one should say "fewer".

People, places, and concrete objects such as erasers are countable. When I specify my friend Mary I do it because I'm aware that a number of other folks have the same name. When I specify Vancouver, BC I do it because I know there's a city in Washington State with the same name. WRT erasers.... I have two, actually, but I would direct others to the one which is easier to find if they don't care whether they are using a Pink Pearl or an artist's gum eraser.

I reckon where some of the confusion lies is that we treat abstract nouns as singular. Your teachers & mine may not have gone into detail re such concepts because... while the average student in junior high is experiencing a phase of rapid brain growth which is the ideal time to introduce them... other students will claim loudly & adamantly that abstract nouns don't exist because Miss Grinch in grade three never mentioned them. OTOH, the common parlance is rife with examples many native speakers will have seen or heard before:


Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Handsome is as handsome does.

Happiness is a warm puppy.

Home is where the heart is.

Honesty is the best policy.

Many a mickle makes a muckle (Scottish proverb).

Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.

The square on the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of
the squares on the other two sides.


If we cast our minds back a century or so, many people from Ireland decided to relocate in the USA because the Potato Blight meant they didn't have enough to eat. Not long afterward some of my ancestors from England decided to relocate in Canada... perhaps at least in part, as I discovered recently, because there was an economic recession in certain areas which made it difficult for them to find paid employment. When I run examples through my head, using synonyms for "lack", I keep coming up with the same answers. Whether these people suffered from a lack of food, an insufficiency of funds, or what have you they chose to "seek their fortune" in a developing country which eagerly adopted & sometimes even actively recruited farmers & other skilled workers of all sorts.... :-))




--- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+
* Origin: Wits' End, Vancouver CANADA (1:153/716)

I may be using "singular" and "uncountable" interchangably
(and incorrectly!), but I would use MEANS in your example
also.

IMHO your usage is correct, although you're not sure how to explain it. Maybe I can help a bit re the latter.... :-)

That is a good way to put it. :)

As a native speaker, you may not have heard the terms "countable" &
"uncountable" in school. I think I probably learned them from Alexander. But >you may recall being taught about stuff which is usually measured by weight or >by volume... e.g. various liquids, meat/fish/poultry, cheese, and salt because >it's okay to say "less" whereas with countable objects one should say "fewer".

Thanks, I am not sure I did ever hear those terms used, but you have successfully reminded me of the difference between using "less" and
"fewer." I shall have to admit that it this part of the US, you are not
likely to hear "fewer" used much... although I agree it is correct, I
believe most Kentuckians would use "less" in both instances. :)

I reckon where some of the confusion lies is that we treat abstract
nouns as singular. Your teachers & mine may not have gone into detail re such >concepts because... while the average student in junior high is experiencing a >phase of rapid brain growth which is the ideal time to introduce them... other >students will claim loudly & adamantly that abstract nouns don't exist because >Miss Grinch in grade three never mentioned them. OTOH, the common parlance is >rife with examples many native speakers will have seen or heard before:

I am not certain that we spent much time on abstract nouns, either. We did learn that they could be used as nouns but I don't think much emphasis was
put on the "abstract" bit. :)

Mike

---
þ SLMR 2.1a þ Gender: ___ Male ___ Female _X_ Wraeththu
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

Hi, Mike! Recently you wrote in a message to ARDITH HINTON:

As a native speaker, you may not have heard the terms
"countable" & "uncountable" in school. I think I
probably learned them from Alexander. But you may
recall being taught about stuff which is usually
measured by weight or by volume... e.g. various
liquids, meat/fish/poultry, cheese, and salt because
it's okay to say "less" whereas with countable objects
one should say "fewer".

Thanks, I am not sure I did ever hear those terms used,
but you have successfully reminded me of the difference
between using "less" and "fewer." I shall have to admit
that it this part of the US, you are not likely to hear
"fewer" used much...

It's becoming increasingly rare around these parts. And FOWLER'S, a
UK source, notes that many people use "less" with countable nouns but describes such situations as "regrettable"... [wry grin].

I am not certain that we spent much time on abstract nouns,
either. We did learn that they could be used as nouns but
I don't think much emphasis was put on the "abstract" bit.

Various terms have been used to codify English grammar. Some people
tried to improve on traditional grammar forty or fifty years ago... but the net result was that many others threw up their hands in despair & gave up trying to figure it out. I am grateful for having learned traditional grammar because my reference books & my Russian friends use +/- the same terminology. When I know the name of some concept or other I can look it up, and I learn a lot that way.

People who are learning English as a foreign language have access to
charts & diagrams you & I have probably never seen. But if as a native speaker you happened to be in my class while another student was trying to persuade his audience that love, friendship, and willingness to learn don't exist because he is stuck on an eight-year-old level... I would have done my best to cite enough examples before the discussion ground to a halt that you would understand. :-)




--- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+
* Origin: Wits' End, Vancouver CANADA (1:153/716)