Those were my initial interpretations, but as you can see, there are other meanings to consider, too. Rewriting a sentence is always a good practice for me, especially if it's not clear or is awkwardly written. Misuse of pronouns is very common in daily conversations, as I indicated in my other examples (reflexives). I can tolerate some verbal grammatical errors, but I'm quite picky when it comes to writing.
You mean you can tolerate some oral grammatical errors. Verbal means "by word, as opposed to thought or action"; oral means "by mouth" or "by speech."
Yeah, I thought of that word as well but decided on verbal instead. Oral sounds I should have just used "spoken."
If people would just simply think before they open their mouths to say anything it would prevent a lot of trouble.
One example that seems counterintuitive to me is this: "There is more than one person that can help you" I've read it is correct but my intuition says that "more than one" should be followed by plural, since "more than one" may stand for, well, more than *one* persons in the above example.
A verbal reprimand means by word of mouth, so scotpens was wrang and Gryffindorian was correct. ps 'wrang' is Scots for 'wrong'
I've spent the last year tutoring English in college to both native English speakers who have been through the North American school system, and ESL students from a variety of countries. What I've learned is that native English speakers don't always know even basic shit, other languages don't always have things like articles and apostrophes (and they get along fine,) and there are actually two forms of English that are equally valid: spoken and written. When we speak "sisters'" and "sister's" it sounds exactly the same. The meaning is different, but the choice of meaning is provided by the context of the rest of the sentence. The neat thing about spoken language is that if the meaning isn't clear, we can see the puzzlement on the other person's face and clarify our statement. Written language needs proper grammar and punctuation because we don't have things like tone of voice, hand gestures, facial expression, and body language to provide context; as well, we do not have the opportunity to address confusion in the listener. There is a somewhat famous story about a legal contract that had millions of dollars at stake because of the placement of a comma. The legal issue was decided because, fortunately, the contract was also written in French, so the intended meaning was clear. Without the bilingual contract, one side may have lost the case unfairly because of the comma. Precision of written language is essential for contracts, legislation, instruction manuals, and most internet posts that are subject to criticism by grammar Nazis. Grammar is not rocket science, and most native English speakers that have had at least some success in the educational system should be able to express themselves through writing in a coherent manner. If they can't, let's not blame the education system. The adults who are attempting to write have at least some responsibility to do so in a manner that provides meaning consistent with generations of language usage. If they are unable, they have at least some responsibility to seek help, or to STFU. Addressing the OP's examples, yes, the first two are valid and the last is simply wrong, for reasons stated. What I appreciate is the connection that the OP is making to grammar and logic. Good grammar is an expression of logical thought. Similarly to mathematics, grammar and punctuation allow the expression of precise facts, and connect them in precise ways. The last example, "One of my sister's friend is an actress" is wrong because "One of" requires multiple possibilities, and "friend" is only one possibility. The statement isn't just grammatically incorrect, it is logically and mathematically incorrect. Proper use of language catches such errors, but more importantly, thinking in proper language forms prevents us from making such logical errors.
^ Gryffindorian likes this. I agree that the error is obvious in the given example "One of my sisters' friend" because the one of prepositional phrase requires an object that is plural in number. Some people erroneously view the phrase "one of my sisters'" as a single individual and treats it as the possessive form that describes a noun, in this case, friend. My sister's/sisters' friend My sister Barbara's friend Barbara's friend Her friend Those phrases are all easy to understand. When it comes to "one of," some speakers immediately substitute it with the possessive and think, "One of my sisters' [Barbara's] friend is in town," which is incorrect. For it to be grammatically correct, "one of" must refer to a plural possessed object "friends" rather than "sisters." In sum, when one incorrectly identifies the object in the prepositional phrase "one of," then it becomes a problem.
I'm at a loss as to how someone could get that from the sentence. The subject of the sentence reduces to the pronoun "one," modified by the prepositional phrase "of my sister's friends." "One" as a pronoun refers to part of a group or number, so should not be modified by a singular prepositional object. The only possessives, "my" and "sister's," modify "friends." As opposed to "one" in a sentence like "One friend was an actress," where "one" is an adjective modifying "friend," the subject.
Believe me; it happens. I've heard someone say, "I went to one of my brothers' house this weekend ..." which, by the way, is equivalent to saying, "I went to my brother's house." Some people say (and this is yet another wrong example), "One of my sisters' husband is a doctor," probably out of fear of giving the notion that such a sister was polyandrous by saying, "one of my sister's husbands." How many husbands does your sister have? EDIT: It would be a much more clear to say, "the husband of one of my sisters," or simply, "my brother-in-law."