Can the Subject Do The Verb?

36. Can the Subject do the Verb?

Just like subjects and their verbs must agree in number, an author must ask whether or not his subject is capable of doing the verb his sentence suggests. We have an unfortunate tendency to “personify” objects—I blame Disney—and this pervades our writing and leads to sometimes comical, sometimes confusing mental images. When you are describing the action some subject takes, make sure to evaluate whether that object is capable of taking that action. If not, find a different action that more adequately explains your point.

• Example: “The Cassites drive researchers mad.”

It is perfectly viable to suggest that the study of some little-known historical entity can be frustrating. However, that's not what this phrase says. The Cassites, an extinct Mesopotamian culture with very little documentary evidence of their existence, take researchers for a ride in some ancient, Flintstonian Buick. Obviously that isn't what we actually mean. We mean that the lack of documentary evidence makes researchers crazy, even drives them mad. But that's the research process and the lack of records doing that action, not the historical entity. The Cassites themselves cannot do the action ascribed to them in this example.

• Example: “The temple records found at Lagash show a net reduction in crop yields as a result of salinized soil.”

Temple records, as an inanimate object, cannot show anyone anything. They can reveal information, or evidence some condition, or even enable further research. This is a common misuse of the verb “to show” that ought to be shown the door.

• Example: “The Mesopotamian desert sees little to no rain in the summer months.”

I imagine a whole desert of little eyes popping up looking about for rain, something like the disembodied eyes of an Arabian Punxsutawney Phil. However, when explained this way it is clear that the desert as incapable of seeing anything. Perhaps you mean it receives little rainfall, or that very little rain falls on the desert in Mesopotamia. Either way, we ought to be clear about what the desert can actually do.

Note: personification of objects can sometimes be done intentionally to clarify a condition or fact. This is called metaphor, but it presents a whole other range of issues. Read about metaphor in section 39 to find distinctions between personification and metaphor, and especially how to just avoid both things all together.

Home-Introduction

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.

Just like subjects and their verbs must agree in number, an author must ask whether or not his subject is capable of doing the verb his sentence suggests. We have an unfortunate tendency to “personify” objects—I blame Disney—and this pervades our writing and leads to sometimes comical, sometimes confusing mental images. When you are describing the action some subject takes, make sure to evaluate whether that object is capable of taking that action. If not, find a different action that more adequately explains your point.

	• Example: “The Cassites drive researchers mad.”
	It is perfectly viable to suggest that the study of some little-known historical entity can be frustrating. However, that's not what this phrase says. The Cassites, an extinct Mesopotamian culture with very little documentary evidence of their existence, take researchers for a ride in some ancient, Flintstonian Buick. Obviously that isn't what we actually mean. We mean that the lack of documentary evidence makes researchers crazy, even drives them mad. But that's the research process and the lack of records doing that action, not the historical entity. The Cassites themselves cannot do the action ascribed to them in this example.

	• Example: “The temple records found at Lagash show a net reduction in crop yields as a result of salinized soil.”
	Temple records, as an inanimate object, cannot show anyone anything. They can reveal information, or evidence some condition, or even enable further research. This is a common misuse of the verb “to show” that ought to be shown the door.

	• Example: “The Mesopotamian desert sees little to no rain in the summer months.”
	I imagine a whole desert of little eyes popping up looking about for rain, something like the disembodied eyes of an Arabian Punxsutawney Phil. However, when explained this way it is clear that the desert as incapable of seeing anything. Perhaps you mean it receives little rainfall, or that very little rain falls on the desert in Mesopotamia. Either way, we ought to be clear about what the desert can actually do.
	Note: personification of objects can sometimes be done intentionally to clarify a condition or fact. This is called metaphor, but it presents a whole other range of issues. Read about metaphor in section 39 to find distinctions between personification and metaphor, and especially how to just avoid both things all together.