Self-driving cars <is/are> an example

Hi, deepcosmos -- It does not work to say, *"They is an example of something." I'm not inclined to speculate on the psychological causes of the writer's grammatical error, which I do not think can be rescued by postulating inversion, though that is clever of you. Alas, the author did not write, "The self-driving car is an example of a joint cognitive system." That would have worked well.

@David, Moderator posted:

Hi, deepcosmos -- It does not work to say, *"They is an example of something." I'm not inclined to speculate on the psychological causes of the writer's grammatical error, which I do not think can be rescued by postulating inversion, though that is clever of you. Alas, the author did not write, "The self-driving car is an example of a joint cognitive system." That would have worked well.

I'm really fortunate to be able to get two replies from you even in weekend, David.

@David, Moderator posted:

Hi, deepcosmos -- It does not work to say, *"They is an example of something." I'm not inclined to speculate on the psychological causes of the writer's grammatical error, which I do not think can be rescued by postulating inversion, though that is clever of you. Alas, the author did not write, "The self-driving car is an example of a joint cognitive system." That would have worked well.

Hello, David, this is a belated inquiry.

With the version - "An example of a joint cognitive system is self-driving cars, where a person turns on and off the driving." why do you think it doesn't work? Instead, should it be grammatically written, "An example of a joint cognitive system is that of self-driving cars, where a person turns on and off the driving"? If so, the existence - that of - is essential in this context?

Your another explanation would be really appreciated.

@deepcosmos posted:

With the version - "An example of a joint cognitive system is self-driving cars, where a person turns on and off the driving." why do you think it doesn't work?

Hello again, deepcosmos—I don't think that that sentence doesn't work. That sentence is fine. We weren't talking about that sentence. We were talking about the sentence in which "self-driving cars" comes first.

@deepcosmos posted:

Instead, should it be grammatically written, "An example of a joint cognitive system is that of self-driving cars, where a person turns on and off the driving"? If so, the existence - that of - is essential in this context?

No, "that of" is not essential. Indeed, in my opinion, it makes the sentence worse, precisely because there is no need for it. Notice that nobody would say something like "An example of an ice-cream flavor is the example of chocolate."

@David, Moderator posted:

Hello again, deepcosmos—I don't think that that sentence doesn't work. That sentence is fine. We weren't talking about that sentence. We were talking about the sentence in which "self-driving cars" comes first.

No, "that of" is not essential. Indeed, in my opinion, it makes the sentence worse, precisely because there is no need for it. Notice that nobody would say something like "An example of an ice-cream flavor is the example of chocolate."

Hi, David, really thanks for you reply.

1. Then, would you kindly explain whether the inverted version B could be a good alternative and be rescued, if the original sentence reads A?;

A. Self-driving cars, where  . . . the driving, are an example of a joint cognitive system.

B. An example of a joint cognitive system is self-driving cars, where . . . the driving.

2. By the way, if you don't mind, would you also share your opinion for the following thread, though Gustavo has already given me really good explanation, which I'm appreciating;

https://thegrammarexchange.inf...y=696856188796199817

@deepcosmos posted:

1. Then, would you kindly explain whether the inverted version B could be a good alternative and be rescued, if the original sentence reads A?;

A. Self-driving cars, where  . . . the driving, are an example of a joint cognitive system.
B. An example of a joint cognitive system is self-driving cars, where . . . the driving.

Hi, deepcosmos—Yes, both (A) and (B) are good alternatives. Though it can be a little awkward to use "An X is Ys" or "Xs are a Y" structures, where a plural is identified with a singular or a singular with a plural, they are acceptable.

@David, Moderator posted:

Hi, deepcosmos—Yes, both (A) and (B) are good alternatives. Though it can be a little awkward to use "An X is Ys" or "Xs are a Y" structures, where a plural is identified with a singular or a singular with a plural, they are acceptable.

Hi, David, how could I thank you enough? Gustavo has almost saved me from another headache with a conditional sentence. With my sincere RESPECTs to all of you in G/Exchange~!!