General Forum

Author

Comment

May 19, 2015 - 10:16PM

Why is this sentence incorrect? Or is it?

1) We appreciate you taking the time to tell us about your experience.

Instead it could be:

2) We appreciate your taking the time to tell us about your experience.

So the difference here is you versus your. But if you make another substitution and say:

3) We appreciate our customers taking the time to tell us about their experiences.

Based on that third example using 'our customers', is using 'you' in the first example incorrect? I concede that 2 is correct, but based on 3 being correct as well, wouldn't 1 also have to be?

Paul Matthews

May 20, 2015 - 3:50PM

Re: Why is this sentence incorrect? Or is it?

Leroywaggle

Your example 1) is fine. The genitive "your" can be replaced in informal style by accusative (or plain) case "you". It's just a matter of style level, not grammaticality.

PaulM

GUEST

May 21, 2015 - 4:05AM

Re: Why is this sentence incorrect? Or is it?

In (1), and (2), the object of the sentence is the gerund 'taking'.

In (3), you have changed the structure of the sentence, so that the object is now 'our customers'
BUT
it should be written as

our customers' taking (Using the possessive form).

"You don't need good grammar to be understood. You DO need good grammar to be respected."
Marianne Celce-Murcia

Use the possessive determiner!

GUEST

May 21, 2015 - 5:34AM

Re: Why is this sentence incorrect? Or is it?

The second sentence should read :

In (3), you have changed the structure of the sentence, so that the object is now ' our customers taking'

I left out 'taking'.

Paul Matthews

May 21, 2015 - 9:19AM

Re: Why is this sentence incorrect? Or is it?

GUEST

In (1), and (2), the object of the sentence is the gerund 'taking'.

NOT TRUE! In (1) "You" is the subject of the subordinate clause and "taking the time to tell us..." is the predicate, a VP. Thus, "taking" is a verb (not a gerund) which has the constituent "the time to tell us about your experience" as its object. "Taking" is a present participle verb-form. There is no so-called 'gerund' at all in this sentence.

The same applies to (2): "your" is subject of the subordinate clause, "taking" a verb, and "the time to tell us about your experience" as its object. Traditional grammar would define this "taking" (but not the "taking" in 1.) as a gerund, though in modern grammar we simply see it as a verb. Note that "taking" can take an adverb as modifier: "you/your repeatedly taking the time.. "; further proof that it's a verb, not a noun (gerund).

In (3), you have changed the structure of the sentence, so that the object is now 'our customers'
BUT
it should be written as

our customers' taking (Using the possessive form).

NOT SO! There is nothing wrong at all with the sentence as it was originally written. Again, it's a matter of free choice between the plain form and the genitive case, just as there is for "you and "your" in (1) and (2). Having said that, many speakers would not see the genitive case as a plausible option here; rather a straightforward non-finite clause meaning "We appreciate the fact that our customers take the time to tell us about their experiences".

"You don't need good grammar to be understood. You DO need good grammar to be respected."
Marianne Celce-Murcia

I agree, but the choice between plain vs genitive case is not a matter of good grammar, but one of style, as I keep saying. Most grammarians have debunked prescriptive grammar (like gerunds being noun objects) for many years now!

Use the possessive determiner!

PRESCRIPTIVE POPPYCOCK! It's a free choice, as I've set out above. And as I said before, the genitive "your" can be replaced by plain case "you". It's a matter of style level, not grammaticality. The same applies to the OP's third example: plain form "customers" and genitive case "customers'" are both perfectly acceptable, the former being the informal alternant.

FOOTNOTE: In modern grammar, "appreciate" is a called a 'catenative' verb and the subordinate clauses in (1)-(3) are called catenative complements.

PaulM