1

These alerts are part of the testing process, do not indicate an actual emergency, and do not require any action at your end.

Is it grammatical to omit the subject in a compound sentence with both affirmative and negative sentences? I feel the second and third sentences are imperative.

8
  • 2
    Syntactically, it's fine. Stylistically, some people will probably say it would be better to re-state the subject before the first "polarity switch" (using negated do-support). Personally, I think that "stylistically weak" assessment applies even more strongly if you start with a negated assertion, then continue with non-negated elements: These alerts do not require any action at your end, are part of the testing process, and are for information only. But that's all subjective, matter of opinion. It's an interesting point to raise, though. Oct 11, 2023 at 10:22
  • @FumbleFingers Does the compound sentence sound odd to your ear, a native speaker's ear? Oct 11, 2023 at 10:32
  • 2
    I would say the example is a poor stylistic choice (not so much a grammar issue). When I first began to read the sentence, I had to do a double-take, and read it again to check. That is never a good sign. The sentence is what I would call awkward rather than wrong. I would prefer "These alerts, which are part of the testing process, do not . . . , and do not . . . "
    – Billy Kerr
    Oct 11, 2023 at 10:34
  • @BillyKerr That rewrite sounds excellent to me too! Oct 11, 2023 at 10:40
  • 1
    You'll end up not seeing the wood for the trees, with stylistic recommendations ranging from It's okay as it is (do nothing) to complete rewrite. I suggest if the way you originally wrote it seemed "natural" to you (albeit with misgivings), a minimal change to resolve those misgivings is the easiest way to improve your English without having to seriously rethink the whole utterance. And that minimal change is simply to include they before do not indicate... (Personally, I'd include capitalized They, to start a new sentence, but commas are all the rage these days! :) Oct 11, 2023 at 11:32

1 Answer 1

1

Yes, that sentence has correct grammar. If the second and third parts were imperative sentences, they would all have to either be separated within the sentence with conjunctions like "so" or "and", or separated into separate sentences:

These alerts are part of the testing process, so do not indicate an actual emergency, and do not require any action at your end.
OR
These alerts are part of the testing process. Do not indicate an actual emergency. Do not require any action at your end.

These two versions are nonsense of course, since those imperative commands don't make sense in the context, but demonstrate how we know the original sentence does not have any imperatives.

THAT SAID, the wording is awkward, and the reader would likely have to go back and read again to make sure they understood. It would be better phrased as two sentences:

These alerts are part of the testing process. They do not indicate an actual emergency, and do not require any action at your end.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .