grammaticality - was or were in Subjunctive Mood

Which of following sentences is formed properly? Why?

Although Reza has a successful career as a lawyer, he still wishes he
was a rock musician.

or

Although Reza has a successful career as a lawyer, he still wishes he
were a rock musician.

articles - Do you use "a" or "an" before acronyms / initialisms?

99% of the time, I'm clear on when I should use "a" versus "an." There's one case, though, where people & references I respect disagree.

Which of the following would you precede with "a" or "an," and why?

• FAQ


• FUBAR


• SCUBA

[Note: I've read the questions "A historic..." or "An historic…"? and Use of "a" versus "an", but the rules given there don't necessarily apply here.]

---

[Edited to add]

Here's a shorter (and hopefully clearer) version of the question… In written English, which is correct (and why): "a FAQ" or "an FAQ"?

Some references with differing opinions:

Answer

It depends on whether the abbreviation is an acronym or an initialism. As "fubar" and "scuba" are usually pronounced as a word (making them acronyms), it would make sense to say "a fubar" and "a scuba diver". "FAQ" is a bit harder, because I have heard people say it like an initialism: "‹f›‹a›‹q›", while others pronounce it as an acronym /fæk/. Therefore, one should write either "a FAQ" or "an FAQ" depending on how that person pronounces it, ie, whether it is an acronym or an initialism.

word choice - Should "forty-year" in this context be hyphenated?

Mr. Willow’s more than forty-year experience in the industry persuaded me to apply.

Or is the following a better way of saying it?

Mr. Willow's more than forty years of experience in the industry persuaded me to apply.

Are they both correct, or should the hyphen in the first example be removed?

grammar - Why is it common in English to address animals as "it"?

Why is it common in English to address animals as "it"?

It's not an inanimate or abstract object, they have a gender and they're alive.

A chair, idea, tree, rock, etc are an "it", but why does English speakers address a dog, cat, bird, fish, etc as "it"?

Isn't male the "default gender" in English?

Answer

No, unlike many other Indo-European languages, current English has no default gender. Grammatically speaking, English does not have gender at all—the only gender that English marks at all is natural gender (sex).

When the natural gender of a living being is known, it is customary to refer to that being using pronouns that reflect that gender; for male beings, we use he/him/his, and for female beings, we use she/her/her(s). As you say, animals do have natural gender, and there is nothing to stop you from using the corresponding gendered pronoun. When referring to your own dog, for example, most people will use gendered pronouns. In many cases, however, you simply don’t know what sex an animal is at first blush.

With some animals, the distinction is fairly easy to make—a buck with its antlers looks quite different from a doe, for instance—and figuring out the right pronoun tends to be easy. With other animals, however, it’s not so easy. I for one would have absolutely no clue whether a cat or a turtle or a grizzly bear is male or female just by looking at it.

In those cases, you can either choose to use a gendered pronoun and then have a 50% chance of being right; or you can skirt the issue altogether and use it, which is sex-agnostic.

The same is true of human infants, incidentally. Babies all look the same (quoth the bachelor), and it can be quite impossible to tell whether a clothed baby is a boy or a girl. Until you find out, you can dodge the risk of mis-gendering it by calling it it (cf. this question).

Historically speaking, English did of course have genders, including using the masculine as the default gender; but while some still consider using he to refer to being(s) of unknown sex to be neutral, many people nowadays consider this to go against the notions of equal rights. Some have started using she as the default gender instead for obviously animate beings. When dealing with (non-infant) human beings, where it would be depersonalising and degrading, many now use singular they.

With animals, the notion of ‘depersonalising’ is rarely an issue, and it remains the more common way to get around the issue. That is, the ‘default gender’ for non-human entities is no gender, whether the entity in question has a natural gender or not.

Perfect vs Perfect Continuous

I saw this sentence the other day and it struck me as awkward. I went online and saw many instances of the present perfect being used in such manner.

She has worked here since 1995

Shouldn't this be written in the perfect progressive?

She has been working here since 1995

The Ngram shows the perfect taking over. It feels wrong. Am I justified here?

^{Ngram Google Books Viewer}

I don't mean to sound defiant but the "HAS WORKED" gives me the impression that she has just been fired. I might be being over analytical and it seems that "the present perfect has become the standard" and that "the present perfect has been used / has been being used" since 1980. Wouldn't the exception be "subject + have/has + been + adjective/noun" as in "It has been the standard since".

I am adding some more sentences to the question and appreciate the help.

He has travelled to São Paulo since the beginning of the year.

He has been traveling to São Paulo since the beginning of the year.

I see it as a convention for the misuse of the verb tense.

OXFORD
the form of a verb that expresses an action done in a time period up to the present, formed in English with the present tense of have and the past participle of the verb, as in I have eaten.

CAMBRIDGE
the form of the verb used for actions or events that have been completed or that have happened in a period of time up to now:

The sentences 'She has broken her leg' and 'I have never been to Australia' are all in the present perfect.

BRITISH COUNCIL
We use the present perfect tense:
for something that started in the past and continues in the present:

WIKIPEDIA
The present perfect is a grammatical combination of the present tense and the perfect aspect, used to express a past event that has present consequences. The term is used particularly in the context of English grammar, where it refers to forms such as "I have left" and "Sue has died". These forms are present because they use the present tense of the auxiliary verb have, and perfect because they use that auxiliary in combination with the past participle of the main verb. ...
... English also has a present perfect progressive (or present perfect continuous) form, which combines present tense with both perfect aspect and progressive (continuous) aspect: "I have been eating". In this case the action is not necessarily complete; the same is true of certain uses of the basic present perfect when the verb expresses a state or a habitual action: "I have lived here for five years."

I wanna say that I stand corrected. And the evidence is here.

I will be honest with you and say that I personally disagree. Especially with "all my life" and "since"
I guess it is because I learned that the action does not continue but has implications in the present.
There is absolutely no need for the present continuous if I can manipulate the meaning of the perfect with the predicate.

Answer

Both expressions are correct and the difference in meaning between them is minimal. They both inform us when the action, to work, began and that it is ongoing.

Work is a verb which we can use in the present and present progressive tense.

• "She works in this company" describes a habitual action.
  



• "She is working at the moment" describes an action in progress but its duration is temporary.

Thus the present perfect progressive can be seen as related to the progressive and present aspect.

She has been working here since 1995

This sentence is acceptable but because the duration of the action is quite extensive, (18 years), people tend not to consider an action lasting that long to be temporary in nature.

Moreover, this response could answer one of many questions but without any specific context I can only make suppositions. My view is that the simplest, most logical and common question asked would be:

How long has she worked there?

It is important to note that the action is NOT finished. The person is still working for the same company. If not, the question ought to be like this:

• How long did she work there?

the answer would look something like this,

• She worked here for 18 years.

The action is completed and we naturally give the total number of years she worked for the company i.e. "for 18 years".

Someone who still works in the same company for 18 years (and therefore, has NOT been fired from her job) is likely to continue working there tomorrow, next month, and the year after etc. The implication being she has a steady, regular job. Therefore, the longer and the more permanent the action is, the more speakers will prefer the present perfect usage.

She has worked here since 1995.

---

Addendum

In the case of someone travelling to a place, normally we imagine someone either taking a plane, or hiking to a far-away land. In the OP's example São Paulo is the man's destination.

He has been traveling to São Paulo since the beginning of the year.

The "to" implies that the man has not yet arrived at São Paulo. The act of travelling to a place is still ongoing. Perhaps he is hitch-hiking and prefers to stop at different locations along the way. Although grammatically correct, it sounds a bit odd; normally speakers would say of people traveling in their sabbatical leave:

He's still traveling, and visiting different places before he arrives
at São Paulo.

The use of "ing" adds an element of dynamism to the sentence and implies the situation is evolving and progressing. If the intention was to say that the man is already in São Paulo, then both perfect aspects are acceptable and correct.

He has been traveling in/around São Paulo since the beginning of the year

and

He has traveled in/around São Paulo since the beginning of the year.

In this case I would prefer the ing structure (present progressive) because presumably the man at some point will return home, wherever that may be. Hence, the focus is on the temporality and dynamic aspect of the action.

---

A is for aspect http://youtu.be/NfyZOr4Gg64?t=1m16s

Born in New Zealand, Scott Thornbury, is a well-known academic in the field of English language teaching and author of many books on teacher training. Thornbury discusses the uses of present aspect in this video.

hyphenation - What role does the hyphen serve in this context?

What role does the hyphen (it's not confused with an em dash) serve in these two contexts, and how to successfully replicate the conditions (to use it in any sentence I wish to).

You take your obligation to deliver an package very seriously - an ethic for which I am grateful.

But - you have a way of exceeding expectations, don't you?

I've searched a few sites, even this, but it's difficult when you have no firm grasp on the subject. If you realize where the quotes are from, please shh - embarrasing (also, is it correct to use a hyphen here, I have no idea).

Answer

Update : Kate Bunting has a good point. In this context, dash may be a more appropriate term. Strictly speaking, Hyphen only refers to the (-) symbol in-between parts of a hyphenated word. For example, long-distance as in They are in a long-distance relationship is a hyphen.

In this context the dash is used as a long pause, providing separation between two related clauses. It's similar in function to a semicolon and you can maybe think of it as like a double-comma.

Did you get the bread, I'm hungry. (short pause)

Did you get the bread - I'm hungry. (medium pause)
Did you get the bread; I'm hungry. (also medium pause, but perhaps a bit more archaic)
Did you get the bread. I'm hungry. (longer pause)

It's not a particularly formal manner of writing, but it's certainly not incorrect. From a linguistic perspective, so long the average speaker can understand the meaning then it's valid, even if it doesn't meet the "formal" definitions of grammar. That's not to say that the rules of grammar don't have their place, but in literature authors have always bended the rules to create the kind of feeling they desire.

For the record, I'm not sure whether (-) is technically grammatically correct or not. Maybe somebody else can weigh in on this.

grammatical number - Why do we use the singular in a comparative sentence?

In a comparative sentence, like the one below, we use the singular form in the second clause:

Rebecca is the most beautiful girl in the school. She is more beautiful than any other girl

and not:

*[...] She is more beautiful than any other girls.

Why do we use the singular and not the plural? Why is the second example not acceptable?

Answer

The "any other" construction takes the singular because the comparison is one-to-one.

She is more beautiful than any other girl.

is equivalent to:

She is more beautiful than any other individual girl.

You could express a similar sentiment with a construction that takes the plural "girls" like so:

She is more beautiful than other girls.

But this works because, in this case, the comparison is one-to-many.

In short: as an adjective in this case, 'any' can take the singular