212. Special Uses of “Do” 1

.

Some of the many uses of “do” can be problematic even for advanced learners of English

THE DIFFICULTY OF “do”

Small, common verbs like do tend to become familiar early in the learning of English, but because they have numerous meanings and uses, their mastery usually remains elusive until very late. My aim here (and in the post after this) is to consider in some depth a few uses of do that readers of this blog might still be finding problematic. Although these could also be found in a dictionary, the necessarily brief descriptions there can make understanding and memorisation of the large amounts of information quite difficult.

In keeping with the general aims of this blog, I do not propose to say much about conversational uses of do or the basic grammar of the verb DO, such as its role as an “auxiliary” before other verbs to make them interrogative, negative or emphatic (though for something on the latter, see 125. Stress and Emphasis, #2). The approach is thus similar to that elsewhere in this blog with HAVEMAKE,  GO,  GIVETAKECOME and SEE.

.

USING “do” TO REPEAT A PREVIOUS VERB

Just as pronouns facilitate repetition of a noun meaning without repeating the noun itself, so DO can facilitate repetition of a verb meaning:

(a) When the brain stops living, its owner does too.

Most readers will know that the verbs DO repeats are single-word ones (except BE) or multi-word ones starting with DO. Single-word occurrences of BE are just repeated unchanged, while multi-word verbs starting with a different “auxiliary” (BE, HAVE or “modals” like will or can) are usually repeated with that (see 237. Auxiliary Verbs in Professional Communication, #1).

Even when repetition needs DO, variations are possible. A second auxiliary can be added, for example will do in (a) instead of does to emphasize inevitability. We could even drop do and just say will.

When DO is the sole repeating verb, it sometimes needs so, it, that or the same after it. Many such uses are outside the scope of this blog through being conversational and/or described in mainstream English coursebooks. However, a few suggestions for differentiating DO, DO SO, DO IT and DO THAT seem justified.

DO Used Alone

Situations where DO without so or similar repeats a verb include the following:

1. Repetition with a Different Object

DO often repeats the meaning of a verb possessing no or the same object. For numerous examples, see below. DO with a different object is often associated with comparisons:

(b) Heat seeks cooler places the way water does lower ones.

Here, does repeats seeks but replaces its object cooler places with the different object lower ones. So cannot be added. For another example, see 288. Grammatical Subtleties, #1.

.

2. Repetition of State Verbs

(c) Few plants live where rhododendrons do.

(d) Children often dislike something because their parents do.

(e) It is beneficial to know a foreign language, and many do.

All of the underlined verbs here express a state rather than an action, and would sound strange followed by do so. Yet if they are replaced by action verbs, do so becomes acceptable. This happens, for example, if dislike something in (d) becomes swear regularly, and know in (e) becomes learn.

.

3. Repetition within Comparisons

Many comparisons make parallel statements with the same verb (see 149. Saying How Things are Similar and 216. Indicating Differences). Often, the second verb mention is simply omitted. However, if an auxiliary is felt to be necessary, any use of DO is usually without so:

(f) Wages rose as much in the North as (they did) in the South.

A major reason for not omitting an auxiliary is to prevent a misunderstanding or double meaning (see 233. Structures with a Double Meaning 3, #5).

.

4. Repetition with “too” or similar

Sentence (a) above illustrates this use. Too and some of its synonyms (also, as well and not…either) allow both DO and DO SO, but others necessitate DO alone. DO SO inside not…either also needs an earlier do:

(g) Chickens do not fly and penguins do not (or do not do so) either.

One synonym of too that allows only DO is the same: one says do the same, not *do so the same. Others are as, and so, neither and nor:

(h) Bees build colonies, … ants.

Here, as or and so combine with do, not do so. So before DO is a different type of so from that used after. It could also start a new sentence, dropping and. For more about as do, see 159. Exotic Grammar Structures 2, #1.

.

5. Emphatic Repetition

DO can repeat an action verb instead of DO SO in order to show emphasis:

(i) Few people eat insects but some do.

(j) If you wish to ask a question, please do.

Here do would probably be pronounced strongly. In (i), it highlights the surprise of some after its earlier opposite few. In (j), where please introduces an invitational imperative verb typical of oral presentations (see 186. Language in Oral Presentations), do instead of do so makes the invitation more insistent.

DO before SO, IT or THAT

Like DO, DO SO is compulsory in certain situations. In general, these seem to be repetitions of an action verb outside of situations 2, 3 and 4 above. Examples are:

(k) Drivers should not park here. Those who do so will be fined.

(l) Many people like to shop but it is difficult to do so when disabled.

(m) Please ask questions if you wish to do so.

Sentence (k) could actually have do alone, but with a more emphatic meaning, highlighting its oppositeness to should not park and perhaps thereby making it sound a defiant action.

DO SO may differ in meaning from DO IT and DO THAT. It is usually preferred with everyday actions carried out or experienced without detailed thought or purpose, such as STOP LIVING in (a), SHOP in (l) and ASK QUESTIONS in (m).

DO SO can additionally refer to actions that are more a special event or task or achievement, such as contact a journal editor, learn Chinese or measure air pollution levels. DO IT and DO THAT mostly refer only to these. DO THAT suggests the event has special extraordinariness (often negative) for the speaker – in keeping with the general use of that to distance its user from something (see 234. Adjective and Pronoun Uses of “that”).

.

USING “do” TO ANTICIPATE A LATER VERB

Do can as easily refer forward to a later verb as backward to an earlier one. One common use is with a following this + a colon. Another is in statements beginning with What…:

(n) What the system does is MEASURE SPEED.

Here, what is linked to the capitalised words at the end, not something outside the sentence, by is just before them, this indicating that they carry the main information. DO is not always possible in such sentences: the first of the words after is must be a verb like measure. If it is not, another verb will already be where does is above. For a full analysis, see 145. Highlighting with “What” Sentences.

.

MEANINGS OF “do” WITH AN OBJECT

DO is typically a “transitive” verb – requiring a following noun or equivalent as its “object”. Its fundamental meaning might be described as action applied to its object. However, that is not much help in deciding where it can and cannot be used – recognising actions is very subjective. Here are some sub-meanings – often with fairly predictable objects (see 273. Verb-Object Collocations) – that may prove helpful.

6. Engage in

With this meaning the object represents an extended activity, often without a clear beginning and end. The meaning is “perform (the object activity) without necessarily completing it”. Typical objects include various -ing verbs like ironing, shopping, washing, data-gathering and writing, plus “action” nouns like an activity, calculations, (one’s) duty, an experiment, exercise, research, study, a survey, a task and (home)work.

Action nouns that do not clearly represent an extended activity tend to need other verbs than DO, e.g. MAKE progress, GIVE service and PUT IN effort (or MAKE an effort) (see 173. “Do Research” or “Make Research”?).

.

7. Accomplish

Here, the object often again represents an activity, but all of it from beginning to end. Frequently the activity is recognisably brief and the noun representing it is countable. Typical objects include -ing nouns with the in front, e.g. do the ironing (see 240. Nouns that End with “-ing”), plus business, a calculation, a deed, an exercise, the hard part, an imitation, a job, (one’s) rounds, a study, a survey, a test (= test something) and a tour.

It will be seen that some nouns able to follow DO with the “engage in” meaning can also follow it with this “accomplish” meaning. In addition there is do a walk meaning “accomplish a walk along a fixed extended route” (as opposed to go for a walk, which involves casual, more leisurely walking), and one can also use nouns representing a quantity like 10 minutes or five km.

.

8. Achieve

Objects here again tend to represent either complete activities or quantities. The meaning of “achieve” implies both the completion of the activity/quantity and difficulty in doing so. Unfortunately, there is usually an ambiguity between this sense of DO and that of “accomplish”. For example, did a marathon might indicate its achievement or just finishing it. Note that after completion of a task, did it suggests achievement, have done it mere accomplishment.

.

9. Work on in the Typical Way

Here, objects are not activities but activity recipients. The usage tends to be informal. Thus, doing equations means working to solve them. Other common objects are the garden, one’s hair and a test (= answering questions). The verb WORK ON can be used with such objects too, usually suggesting future completion.

. 

10. Produce/Create

DO with this meaning often accompanies items of food or drink, as in do a cocktail or do a meal. MAKE is usually possible too, the difference perhaps being that MAKE clearly suggests transformation of some kind while DO is vaguer about the manner of production – it could just involve pouring from a bottle or heating in an oven.

Some abstract ideas also follow DO with this meaning, e.g. damage, emails, good, harm, justice, magic and make-up.

.

In addition to all the above uses, DO is the likely choice when the nature of the activity is not clarified by the object. Very often, this will happen with all-referring objects like all, everything, little or nothing, with or without a following except phrase (see 215. Naming Exceptions):

(o) Injured athletes can DO LITTLE except rest.

Finally, there are some very informal meanings, such as “cheat” (e.g. Customers have been done), “suffice for” (e.g. $100 will do me) and “offer for sale” (e.g. The canteen does Ethiopian coffee).

For more about do, see 213. Special Uses of “Do” 2.

211. General Words for People

.

Various words can refer to people in general, but they are not always interchangeable

THE VARIETY OF POSSIBILITIES

English has numerous ways of referring to all people in the world. Consider, for example, what might be possible in the blank spaces in the following:

(a) … who lives by the sword dies by the sword.

(b) … can expect to live for around 80 years.

Wording for people in general that could fill the blank space in (a) includes he, one, someone (or somebody), anyone (or anybody), everyone (or everybody) and a person, but not a human (being) or humanity. In addition, who(so)ever could replace who and the blank space together.

With the verb in (a) made plural (live), the possibilities include they, those or people, but not humans, we or you.

In (b), the blank space could have one, people, we, you, everyone or humans, but not he, humanity, a person, those, someone or anyone.

In this post I wish to consider what differentiates the various expressions listed above. As so often with near-equivalent expressions, the differences seem to be determined as much by grammar as by meaning. Key grammatical factors are whether or not the word for people is made into a longer noun phrase by words placed after it, and whether or not it is in the main part of its sentence.

For advice on referring to general subgroups of people, see 6. Adjectives with Noun 1: People-Naming.

.

THE EFFECT OF WORDS ADDED AFTER

The differences between the possibilities in (a) and (b) above may result primarily from the fact that the people-referring expression in (a) is the start of a longer “noun phrase”, while that in (b) is not.

The added words that create the noun phrase in (a) are who lives by the sword. A noun phrase is recognisable because all the words together can replace a single noun in the sentence – the subject of the main verb dies. Added words beginning with who (or which or that) are a common way to expand a noun or pronoun into a noun phrase – but not the only one (see 252. Descriptive Wording after Nouns 1).

Sentence (b), by contrast, has no added words: a people expression like one comes directly before the verb (can expect) of which it is the subject.

The people expressions that are possible in sentences like (a) differ from each other in the following ways. He was common until recently, but is avoided by many English speakers today because they think it gives insufficient recognition to women. They has a poetic feel. One sounds very formal. A person is quite rare and may sound slightly unnatural to some. Anyone, everyone and who(so)ever are emphatic, highlighting a lack of exceptions. Someone can be ambiguous, because it can refer to an individual as well as to everyone. Perhaps the most preferred options today are the plurals people and those.

There are some hidden subtleties within these possibilities. One does not always mean “people”: in appropriate contexts it means “a single unidentified member of a particular group”. For example, if we say one believes… after an earlier mention of London citizens, it would probably mean “a single unidentified London citizen” (see 263. Uses of “One” and “Ones”). This kind of one has to be repeated with he, she or they, not one (see 204. Grammatical Agreement, #4).

Those can only mean “people in general” when it starts a longer noun phrase (see the end of 234. Adjective and Pronoun Uses of “that”). Even there, however, it does not always have that meaning: it can also mean “people of a particular group”, making it replaceable by the ones. The group must be obvious from either the situation where the statement is made, or the surrounding (usually previous) words:

(c) Immigrants can struggle to find work. Those who succeed often have an unusual skill.

Those here refers to the previously-mentioned immigrants rather than people in general.

People meaning “people in general” at the start of a noun phrase cannot have the. Although the is sometimes possible before a generic noun phrase (see 89. Using “the” with General Meaning, #7), before people in this position it changes the meaning from all people (generic) to some (specific).

The people words that are not possible in (a) are ruled out for the following reasons. You excludes the speaker from the general group, and is hence not a way of indicating everyone in the world. We includes the speaker, but in a small subgroup. Humans implies a contrast with non-humans, a meaning that is obviously not relevant. However, this meaning is relevant in some sentences like (a), and humans is then possible. Humanity is not commonly expanded into a noun phrase.

Of the expressions usable without added words, as illustrated in sentence (b), we and you are possible because they no longer exclude anyone. A common fixed expression with you is What can you do? (see 274. Questions with a Hidden Meaning, #18). However, we and you are often considered inappropriate in professional writing (see 46. How to Avoid “I”, “We” and “You”).

One in sentences like (b) is, like its use in (a), quite formal-sounding, and avoided by many for that reason. Everyone is again emphatic. Humans is possible in (b) because its suggested contrast with other living creatures fits there. However, in some sentences like (b), humans will again be unsuitable.

People again seems the most likely choice in sentences like (b). Once more, it does not usually follow the. This is because the people without added words means “people who are not the government” rather than “everyone” (see 235. Special Uses of “the”, #9).

Of the words that are not possible in sentences like (b), someone and a person are ruled out because they lose their general reference, being more indicative of a particular individual. A possible reason why humanity is unlikely in (b) is that it seems typically to make sentences about human actions rather than their characteristics. Since sentences like (b) must sometimes be of this kind, they will sometimes allow humanity.

.

THE DIFFERENCE MADE BY SENTENCE ROLE

In sentence (a) above, the general people word is the subject of the main verb dies (who being the subject of the secondary verb lives). However, the people word can easily be made the subject of the secondary verb by means of a conjunction, like this:

(d) If one lives by the sword, one dies by the sword.

One consequence of this change is that the people word (one) is no longer starting a longer noun phrase – it is more like the use of one in (b), and indeed can similarly also be you but not he or those. However, (d) is not completely like (b) because it also allows someone instead of one. If someone is used, any repetition of it has to be they, not one.

The possibility of using someone between a conjunction and a secondary verb is quite common. Here is another example, this time involving the conjunction before:

(e) Before someone runs a marathon, they should train extensively.

However, there are cases where someone is not an alternative to one in sentences like (d) and (e):

(f) However one looks at it, the future is bleak.

Someone here would be referring to a particular unidentified person rather than people in general. The cause of this change might be that the main part of the sentence (…is bleak) refers to a particular time, not all times. Alternatively, the cause may be the particular conjunction however, a negative word meaning “it does not matter how” (see the end of 199. Importance and Unimportance). Just as negative words usually require some to be changed to any, however in this sense may require someone to be changed to anyone. Certainly anyone is a possible way of referring to people in general in (f).

.

OTHER DIFFERENCES THAT DEPEND ON INHERENT MEANING

As mentioned above, the word humans in any structure suggests a contrast with non-humans. However, it is rarely compulsory where this kind of contrast is possible. In sentence (b) above it is easily replaced by one. Consider, however, the following:

(g) Humans can trace their ancestry to Africa.

Replacing humans here with one (and their with one’s) would sound strange. The reason is perhaps that the typical meaning of one, emphasising the speaker’s inclusion in the general group, is irrelevant to the kind of statement being made (the speaker is probably not the actual person who has done the mentioned tracing). A possible reason why one can go in (b) is that the statement there (about the human life span) more personally involves the speaker.

The word human is sometimes misused because it can be either a noun or an adjective. As a noun, it is countable and hence in generalizations needs either a(n) before it or -s after (see 110. Nouns without “the” or “a”). It is a near-synonym of various other nouns, including countable a human being and uncountable humanity and humankind (plus the increasingly unpopular man and mankind). As an adjective, human needs a partner noun, as in human beings, human history or human remains.

Because human can be either a noun or an adjective, both forms are correct in positions allowing either type of word, such as “complements” after BE: one can say either …is human (adjective) or …is a human (noun). Of course, …is a human being is also possible, the complement there being the noun a…being, with human describing it as an adjective. To use an uncountable form like humanity after is a, you have to insert a countable noun + of: usually …a member of… (see 180. Nouns that Count the Uncountable).

Whereas humans suggests a contrast with non-humans, the literary word mortals (see 166. Appropriacy in Professional English) suggests one with immortals like spirits and gods. Even more specialised is persons, the preferred general people word in legal contexts (see 195. Tricky Word Contrasts 7, #6).

Generic we (and its derivatives, e.g. us) is indicated above to resemble one in all sentence types, but to more strongly emphasise the speaker’s inclusion in the general group. Here is a further example:

(g) Most of us need 8 hours of sleep each night.

This use of we/us differs from the non-generic one not just in being more general but also in representing neither a previously-mentioned noun nor one that is obvious from the surroundings – there is no reference to context at all. There is a similar non-contextual use of they, even though they, in excluding the speaker, does not refer to absolutely all people:

(h) They say that global warming will cause suffering.

(i) They never sell diamonds cheaply.