In article <440ffc33$0$25198$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>,
cguttman <4everclever4@web.de> wrote:
> > We can measure an athlete's performance.
> >
> > We can also measure the performance of MANY athletes.
> If we measure the performance for running and swimming of the same
> athlete, can I say that measured two performances?
No. We can say we measured that athlete's performance in two areas.
See "homonym":
> > <http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=homonym>
An athlete's performance is just one thing, even though it can be
measured under many circumstances. It's like his height: we can measure
his height while running, or while swimming, but we've still only
measured the athlete's one and only height, not his heights. There is
only one height or performance.
With a bardic performance, the performance itself is a thing, apart from
the performers. For this reason, there can be two or more of them, and
there can be "performances."
Interestingly, even with multiple things having performance being
measured (as opposed to giving a performance), there's still just the
one.
"My new car really performs well on the highway. Of course, my old car
performed well, too. They both have great performance; I enjoy driving
both of them."
But also...
"That was some performance you gave in the meeting, this morning. While
not quite as entertaining as the one last week, they were both great
performances."
Performance as a measure is singular. Performance as a display can be
plural.
--
Please take off your shoes before arriving at my in-box.
I will not, no matter how "good" the deal, patronise any business which sends
unsolicited commercial e-mail or that advertises in discussion newsgroups.
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
|