| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 126.1 | | VOGON::GOODENOUGH | | Thu Dec 19 1985 12:10 | 2 |
| It's not strictly grammatically correct. I think it only sounds right
because there is an implied subject: [a meal of] pork and beans is good.
|
| 126.2 | | HYDRA::THALLER | | Thu Dec 19 1985 14:59 | 4 |
| The sentence is grammatically correct the way it stands because the subject
'pork and beans' is thought of as a single entity. It has nothing to do
with an implied subject.
|
| 126.3 | | VOGON::GOODENOUGH | | Thu Dec 19 1985 16:11 | 6 |
| OK, I defer to the expert.
However, substitute the local equivalent, 'fish and chips', and it's 'are'.
Jeff.
|
| 126.4 | | AJAX::TOPAZ | | Fri Dec 20 1985 07:21 | 4 |
| The example ("Pork and beans is good") is not only grammatically
questionable; it is factually preposterous.
--M. Brillat-Savarin
|
| 126.5 | | KOALA::ROBINS | | Fri Dec 20 1985 14:04 | 3 |
| Maybe it should be in the Oxymoron note?
Scott
|
| 126.6 | | HARDY::KENAH | | Fri Dec 20 1985 14:10 | 7 |
| re .3: Jeff --
Substitute another local equivalent, 'bubble and squeak', and it's 'is' again.
andrew
|
| 126.7 | | HYDRA::THALLER | | Thu Jan 09 1986 13:14 | 4 |
| re .3
"Fish and chips is good" is grammatically correct. (same rule involved, although
it does sound awkward).
|
| 126.8 | What pork and beans go with! | TOPDOC::SLOANE | | Tue May 06 1986 17:28 | 3 |
| Actually, pork and beans go with note 124.
BS
|
| 126.9 | Subtract from singular to get plural? | CNTROL::HENRIKSON | | Fri Dec 23 1988 22:51 | 4 |
|
If pork and beans is good is correct, then why is it that beans alone _are_ good
Pete
|
| 126.10 | feed 'em beans | RTOIC2::RSTANGE | double double toil & trouble | Tue Dec 27 1988 11:20 | 4 |
| Beans (as well as potatoes) can only be digested when they have
gone through a pig (pork)!
Rudi
|