Is this gramatically correct
As you are probably aware, our contemporary English content is now available through Lexico.com (https://www.lexico.com/en), and our old English dictionary site no longer exists.
As a result of this, this forum is now closed.
The English dictionary community team would like the opportunity to say a huge thanks to all of you who participated by posting questions and helping other community members.
We hope this forum was useful, and that you enjoyed being a part of it.
If you would like to get in touch with any OED-related queries, please write to
[email protected]
And if you would like to contribute suggestions to the OED, please do so by visiting: https://public.oed.com/contribute-to-the-oed/
Thank you very much indeed, and good bye!
The community team
As a result of this, this forum is now closed.
The English dictionary community team would like the opportunity to say a huge thanks to all of you who participated by posting questions and helping other community members.
We hope this forum was useful, and that you enjoyed being a part of it.
If you would like to get in touch with any OED-related queries, please write to
[email protected]
And if you would like to contribute suggestions to the OED, please do so by visiting: https://public.oed.com/contribute-to-the-oed/
Thank you very much indeed, and good bye!
The community team
Comments
@Sk78843
The sentence is perfectly grammatical.
It does sounds a little strange — but not because of the grammar.
It would be unusual to refer to a person as 'someone's friend' — but not impossible. For example:
— We need four horses for the carnival procession. Can the club members provide them?
— None of the members can help, but someone's friend has four horses.
PS
When I say
I mean that it would be unusual to use the expression at the start of a clause as the SUBJECT.
It would not be at all unusual to use it elsewhere in the clause. For example:
He's someone's friend.
Give it to someone's friend.
We could allow someone's friend to do it.