Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2025 May 13

Language desk
< May 12	<< Apr | May | Jun >>	May 14 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

May 13

Subjects of sentences beginning with "Unlike P, Q"

I support that in any sentence beginning with the prepositional phrase "Unlike P" must have a subject Q that parallels the P. Example:

Incorrect: Let's learn to play poker. Unlike some card games, there is no ranking with suits.

Correct: Let's learn to play poker. Unlike some card games, poker has no ranking with suits.

(For anyone who wants to respond to this post, please check out the recent edit I made to the Roulette article.) Is this rule proscribed by many grammarians?? Georgia guy (talk) 23:31, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They both work, but your second example is better, i.e. clearer. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:49, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is certainly not a rule that is followed assiduously:

• Unlike what we have seen in Russia and in the current repression of the media and Internet shutdowns in Belarus, we do not block access to the internet, and people in our country are free to express and disseminate their views both online and offline.^[1]
• Unlike the situation with respect to the trading of goods and services across national boundaries, some might argue that the parameters of the so-called "international technology market "remain vague and ill defined.^[2]
• Unlike last year, supplies of baler twine and wire are expected to be more than adequate this year.^[3]

 ​‑‑Lambiam 07:13, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, you're spot on, imo. In the incorrect version, the 2nd sentence has to be read in conjunction with its 1st sentence, otherwise it's not referring to anything in particular, not even, necessarily, to a card game. In the correct version, the 2nd sentence works fine as it is. However, in common discourse, nobody would misunderstand the incorrect version. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 07:29, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The first sentence exhibits one of the many forms of Ellipsis (linguistics) which is common in many languages, particularly when spoken. (Here, "in poker" has been omitted). Usually, although words omitted in ellipses might be required by strict rules of grammar, actually inserting them can often seem pedantic and would become tedious. Many uses of ellipsis are considered acceptably grammatical. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.170.37 (talk) 18:06, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Being the pedant that I am, I feel an urge to point out that if we seek to make the pre-elision sentence fully grammatical, we need to insert one more word:

• Unlike in some card games, there is no ranking with suits in poker.

 ​‑‑Lambiam 19:26, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Still elided. "Unlike the case in some card games, in poker there is no ranking in suits. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.1.170.37 (talk) 20:54, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is, IMO, a disimprovement.  ​‑‑Lambiam 09:17, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An exprovement? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:12, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, I often change As with to Like because with does not belong. (I imagine some writers remember being scolded for using like.) —Tamfang (talk) 20:17, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tamfang, can you give me an example of when you avoid "as with" and an example where you use "as with"?? Georgia guy (talk) 20:18, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An example with which, as with misleading punctuation, I took issue: Mathematics and architecture are related, since, as with other arts, architects use mathematics for several reasons. which makes me curious about architects' use of mathematics with other arts. —Tamfang (talk) 03:55, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]