Is this sentence correct?

[hoosier]

Math makes sense.
Grammer doesn't.
Does my bias show?

 

[joebryant]

Quote:
That's because math never changes; it's the "perfect science". Language/grammar changes every day. What drives me nuts is when I'm unaware that a regular verb has become an irregular verb because of its constantly being mistakenly used by the majority of people.
For example: drag, dragged, dragged can now be correctly used as drag, drug, drug. It still drives me bananas to hear someone correctly say, "He drug it down the hall." That shows my age. What's worse is knowing that I'm years behind on a lot of other changes that have taken place in the language. NOBODY can stay up 100%, so...

 

[sfw2]

I think we can blame this on the budget constraints that schools (and publishers) are facing. I believe the sentences were shortened to save ink or toner.

The problem might sound better as "What fractional part of the pets is made up of cats?"

Darned economy!

 

[DAFox]

If you reduce the sentence from "What fractional part, of the pets, is birds?" to its very basic structure "What part is birds?", it sounds better. "Part" is the singular subject. The verb "is" agrees with the subject. "Birds" is the object.
I looked this up in a grammar book I have called "Whose Grammar Book is This Anyway?" by E Edward Good. There is a whole chapter devoted to subject-verb disagreements.
Dale-Ann

 

[joebryant]

Quote:
No, it is not an object (N2); it's a predicate noun (N1) (same thing as the subject), and is is the linking verb (LV) connecting it back to the subject (N1).

 

[Sonoran Silkies]

Quote:
"The sort of nonsense up with which I will not put" is a quote of a statement made by Sir Winston Churchill.

 

[Sonoran Silkies]

Quote:
No, it is not an object (N2); it's a predicate noun (N1) (same thing as the subject), and is is the linking verb (LV) connecting it back to the subject (N1).

You must be a fellow English major. Light years ago (yes, I know, mixed metaphor) I took a grammar course in college. We studied three different theories of English grammar.

 

[DAFox]

Quote:
No, it is not an object (N2); it's a predicate noun (N1) (same thing as the subject), and is is the linking verb (LV) connecting it back to the subject (N1).

You are right. I was thinking in very simplistic terms.
Dale-Ann

 

[joebryant]

Quote:
No, it is not an object (N2); it's a predicate noun (N1) (same thing as the subject), and is is the linking verb (LV) connecting it back to the subject (N1).

You are right. I was thinking in very simplistic terms.
Dale-Ann

LOL Actually, in truth, thinking in "simplistic terms" is best because almost nobody gives a rat's tail about any of that stuff I wrote about but linguists like my wife and me. Frankly, posts like this do not belong on a chicken forum or any other forum for that matter because 99% of population has no need for what's being discussed here.

ETA We all knew at least 95% of the English grammar when we entered first grade. Then we suffered through twelve years of English classes pretending to learn the other 5%.

 

[nonseq]

Grammar is fun. Punctuation rocks.