ELL's Cabin

Yes, please. :-)

Morning! (Evening!)

Anonymous

I hear "Why does he want me?"

I think that's possible, too!

Anonymous

What did you hear?

Actually, it's a sentence from Terminator.

Anonymous

2:43 AM

Could be it

It was rerun on my cable, and that sentence puzzled me, so I repeated it, and I think it's a curious way to say the sentence!

The translation on TV is ambiguous (in Thai, it's unclear whether it's it or he).

I can't remember the subtitle now anyway.

The first time I heard it I was sure about Why and want me.

But the middle part was weird, I heard something like "Why swant me?" :-)

Anonymous

It's definitely a reduced pronunciation

It's the first time that I've heard does being reduced to /z/!

Anonymous

Well, it can be reduced to /s/ as in what's

nods -- Wait, /s/, not /z/?

Anonymous

2:51 AM

I wasn't sure whether I should transcribe this as does or 's since it sounds partially reduced to me

Oh, it does indeed sound like /s/.

Anonymous

A friend just had me watch a clip from Whose Line in which Colin says "What once was is no longer were"

staring at the sentence blankly! ...

Why 'was' and then 'were'?

Anonymous

It was ungrammatical but it rhymed! :-)

Whose Line: Scene To Rap - Hospital

LOL -- Oh! That's why!

Anonymous

2:57 AM

►

Anonymous

If you aren't familiar with the show, they do improvisation

Oh, spontaneous rapping!

:-)

I got to that line!

They're all awesome!

I think the script uses it: Why does it want me?

Anonymous

3:14 AM

I don't think I can reliably distinguish he from it from that audio clip alone

Anonymous

I'd presumably rely on context during the movie

Let me see if it's clear in the context (whether it's an it or a he).

Oh, yes. It's clear in the context.

A few minutes earlier, Reese said,

> Listen. Understand. That Terminator is out there. It can't be reasoned with, it can't be bargained with... it doesn't feel pity of remorse or fear... and it absolutely will not stop. Ever. Until you are dead.

11:06 AM

> And what is the construction verb + (verb + ing) called?
http://ell.stackexchange.com/q/35156/3281

Argh! That (sub)question makes the question difficult!

A gerund-participial which can be considered as either an object or an internal complement of verb?

books.google.com/books?id=AMAgAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA213

Q: One of my friend's OR friends' wife? (My friend has only one wife)

11:46 AM

6

Anita is Neil's wife. Neil is one of my friends. Now, how do I refer to Anita? Think that I'm telling someone who does not know the couple. One of my friend's wife OR One of my friends' wife I know the structure one of [something] takes a plural but then, here it is about possession ...

The apostrophe s is one of the common sources of errors made by non-native speakers, imho.

Luckily, these apostrophe s's (genitive case?) can always(?) be rephrased with of.

> Anita is one of the wives of one of my friends.

That's unambiguous.

> Laksami currently works at one of the companies of my friends.

> Laksami currently works at one of the companies my friends commonly own.

There might be some other better adjectives than 'commonly own'...

Afternoon @MARamezani!

Hullo!

Hullo!

How's everything going?

I think... the OP can solve all the problems in the question by himself anyway.

@MARamezani It's going fine on my end. The room is a bit quiet, though.

:D

How are you?

Is it a tough day in classes?

I saw that in the mourning. (BrE form: Moaning)

11:54 AM

Maulik's question, you mean?

@DamkerngT. Nah. It's a tough day in my organochem studies.

Anonymous

Native speakers get confused by that apostrophe thing too :-)

@DamkerngT. No, I meant the being quiet. :}

@snailboat It could be confusing when it's nested!

@MARamezani Ahh... I see.

Good morning @snailboat!

@DamkerngT. It's at least in the top five learner mistakes here.

Good moaning @Snailboat!

11:56 AM

I'm sure I misuse it sometimes.

Oh gimme a moment. Sb's pinging me.

Yay!

Yay?

About the pinging you got. :-)

Well, it was Martin from the other chat that told me goodbye...

11:59 AM

Oh, no!

Oh, you mean goodbye as in see you soon?

I meant the goodbye from the chat I was having in the mourning, nothing serious.

I think I'll stick to misspelling morning from now on.

LOL

Q: What to do with small short answers

Oh, this question in our meta's interesting. I wonder if ELL has something in its meta like this question of ours:

3

As the question suggest can you tell me what to do with small short answers. While reviewing I came across lots of answers in one sentence. For example see this user answer to this question Can dimethylmercury originate from cleaning up a broken thermometer with disposable wet wipes? Answer: ...

discussion

I secretly like short answers.

Heh. I linked my answer instead of the question.

12:02 PM

Oh, no! It's not a secret now!

@DamkerngT. You're exposed.

Anonymous

Uh oh! Sb can be StoneyB, snailboat, or even somebody!

EVEN!

@snailboat I thought Sb meant you! :-)

Apparently, some people in chemistry's chat complained because I use sophisticated English!

Anonymous

12:07 PM

Sophisticated?

I guess that more than a handful of users on Chem SE are young minds around the world.

Funny isn't it!

@DamkerngT. Well, the first complainer was the guy I told you about: Plagiarism thingie etc.

I guess young minds around the world prefer plain English. Not very sure.

@MARamezani Oh, I see.

in The Periodic Table, 20 hours ago, by MARamezani

Feeling yourself against people and being pessimistic about it rather than feeling the being with people.

Maybe they were just nagging about my following the standard syntax in English...

I think it was a plain statement of "I don't understand what you said clearly."

12:15 PM

Don't matter now.

Good!

Let's move on!

It's just that the guy is acting very immature, but let's move on.

> Anita is one of my friends' wives.
http://ell.stackexchange.com/a/55407/3281

Ah, I think that's not quite right!

I think it should be either:

Wife!

How is Anita more than a person?

> Anita is one of my friend's wives.
Anita is one of my friends' wife.

Yes!

Oh, I see--it's possible!

12:21 PM

OH!

I have lots of friends; many of them have a wife; so there are lots of my friends' wives; Anita is one of these.

See, 's is very tricky!

♫♪♫ You only live twice, or so it seems. One for yourself, and one for your dreams... ♫♪♫

Nice!

From an old Bond movie. :-)

Bond is everything but a spy.

LOL

It's hard for me to think of Chinese characters as letters. — Damkerng T. 36 secs ago

A flash comment!

(sneak in, scroll the page up and down for a few seconds, write a comment, post it, sneak out, done)

12:31 PM

@DamkerngT. The question belongs to SO!

Could be!

I think we have a stack for web designers, too. They must surely know what characters are. :-)

Q: Do I need the web.config file in the craft root directory?

3

I'm working off of a linux machine (Apache) I don't use the web.config that's found in /public/web.config. I will use the .htaccess file. I am curious if I can remove the web.config file from /craft/ since I am not in a windows environment. I have been removing it, but not sure if that's exactly...

config

Look at that username!

Is that a taco?

I think so.

That taco looks very cheerful. Maybe it's survived the dragons. :P

12:36 PM

Or maybe it's being loved.

Yeah!

Too much being loved to get eaten...

Anonymous

12:48 PM

I call hanzi 'characters'

Anonymous

When I was younger I called them letters

Anonymous

I didn't know there was a distinction

Got class. Ba bye! Be back in some 2.5 hours!

Q: How to make Compound Adjectives

See you!

@snailboat I think the line is not very clear.

'it's not clear-cut' is probably better

0

I would like to find an easy explanation of how to make compound adjectives. Actually, what I want is a functional way or structure which can help me make it on my own. I read the sentences I have made, but I can't make them sound like these examples: he is left-handed, he is kind-hearted. Here ...

grammar

It's actually a good topic, but I think the question is a bit too broad.

Thinking out of English...

> He was the play-maker of the match.

> He was the [make play] player.

Trying to put it back into English blindingly...

> He was the make-play player.

> He was the makeplay player.

> He was the making-play player.

> He was the made-play player.

> He was the make-played player.

> He was the make-playing player.

> He was the making-played player.

> He was the making-playing player.

> He was the made-played player.

> He was the made-playing player.

> repeat the same with [play make]...

I guess that's the possibilities learners face every time they want to make a compound adjective.

Given that they learn from books.

@DamkerngT. Hi old bean.

1:00 PM

Hi!

Nice quote on the whose each thingie :)

I was about to say "Good evening", but then I'm not sure if it's already evening there. :-)

Ah, it's j

oops, it's about 2pm here

@Araucaria Thanks! I wasn't sure if I would find even one example, but I found one!

@Araucaria Oh! Good afternoon! Then. :-)

How about over there?

1:02 PM

It's 8 p.m. here.

Good evening! :-)

Thanks!

Yes, I thought it was a good one.

Good quote i mean! Oh, got to go already. Am teaching! Have fun all

Have fun!

1:36 PM

Hi @Araucaria

Hi @DamkerngT.

Hi! @Man_From_India

You remember few days back I asked a question regarding using noun phrase as an adverbial (in a friendly way/ a different way)? I got a document that explains exactly that. But unfortunately it's analyzed using linguistic theory. I don't know anything about it. So don't know if that document is helpful for a learner.

It does say that some noun has some property that enable the NP containing that noun act as an adverbial. But again the author analyzed those NP structure using GB theory.

I want to know if the author made some point as to how to know NP can act as an adverbial or not in his/her paper. So I need some help. Let's see if I can find one here :-)

1:52 PM

@Man_From_India I remember the question!

mmm you know about those linguistic theory? Or want to take a look at that paper?

GB theory = Government and Binding theory?

yes yes

It's the first time I've ever heard of it, but I think it shouldn't be too hard to describe the framework in a friendly way (hah! :-).

yes but you know I know nothing about linguistics and its theory :-( I am a pure electronics guy :D

1:55 PM

Here is my general idea: most technical stuff isn't really difficult if the terms and its fundamentals are defined and described clearly.

So, virtually, I believe that there is nothing that difficult.

true :-)

Here you go, in case you want to dig into those NPs that act as adverbials :-)

semlab5.sbs.sunysb.edu/~rlarson/larson85bnps.pdf

looking...

This is a long document. Read it when you are free :-)

Ah, they start with that day.

:D

1:58 PM

Typically, today, tomorrow, yesterday, etc. are considered adverbs.

So, that day functioning as an adverbial modifier is not very outlandish. :-)

yes those are ok...but see that day, last week all are NP

But so is tomorrow.

(Like, Tomorrow never dies, oh, that's a movie title. Tomorrow never comes is probably better. :-)

yes of course

In comprehensive grammar of English language book it mentioned there are very few NPs that can act as adverbials, and that too can be considered as a PP with preposition omitted :-)

This paper also say similar thing.

But I have not gone past that part where the author started to analyze the structure using GB theory.

not making much sense :-(

So, is this paper for or against saying that that day and co. are adverbial modifiers? (I've just read only the abstract.)

@Man_From_India I think it's like many technical things--to understand it, we have to understand a bit about the GB theory first.

It says, GB was developed in Chomsky's work.

@DamkerngT. as far as I understood it, that is considered as a bare NP

@DamkerngT. hmm true...so I am not going into it. It's easier for someone who knows about these stuffs :-)

2:04 PM

Yes, but the opening sentence in the 2nd paragraph is "I argue that although the proper treatment of bare-NP adverbs is problematic within traditional approaches to syntax, ..."

So, to them, it's a bare-NP adverb, afaict.

I am sure snailboat or araucaria can be of help here...but I am not sure if they are at all free :-(

And it'd be easy immediately once we knew whether they consider GB one of the traditional approaches to syntax.

I believe that most linguistics students would know the basic ideas of GB.

@DamkerngT. It's a bare NP that functions as an adverb...and so they called it as bare NP adverbs. I think it is :-)

Yes, that's what the paper says. So they call that day "a class of noun phrases in English" and also "bare-NP adverbs".

Ah, snailboat to the rescue!

nod

:D

Oh she is here :-)

2:08 PM

Our discussion started here @snailboat:

11 mins ago, by Man_From_India

http://semlab5.sbs.sunysb.edu/~rlarson/larson85bnps.pdf

By the way this is our author

:D

Looks like my FF displays the PDF erratically. I should download it...

FF?

:O

Firefox :-)

oh I see....I just thought Fast Food :D

;-)

2:11 PM

Hehe! Sorry for the confusion!

just kidding

BTW, I guess that you've been back on the court already. :-)

No I have not played since :-( but I am fit :-)

Yay (about being fit)! :-)

not a single problem

2:13 PM

Glad to hear that!

i think she is busy now....may be I will ask Jim also when he comes here :-)

Oh, interesting! He (the author) marked this with a star:

> You pronounced my name *this fashion.

naturally :-)

Whereas that way is fine.

yes...that is I think being analyzed using GB theory....

traditional grammar can not explain it according to the author

it's really interesting, isn't it?

i mean those example sentences

2:16 PM

Indeed. Nice findings!

Since I haven't found a good answer to that question, I posted the same thing in ELU forum. But there answer was similar. So I started to search Google, and came across this paper along with many others. But this one is the best suited to my problem.

nods

The example Peter worded/phrased the latter {...} is also interesting.

Oh another thing that paper says (if you haven't reached up to that point), regarding that way and not that fashion.

some nouns has some properties that make NPs that contain that noun act like an adverb.

I've reached the point where the author marked this fashion ungrammatical the way that way can be used.

Evening! @Choko

Hi @Choko

2:21 PM

Oh, here comes a theory that treats bare-NP adverbs as "headless" prepositional phrases.

yes yes that is what Comprehensive Grammar of English Language tells.

Hi

It's funny that I think John hit the ball over the fence can have more than one reading. :-)

Anonymous

Hello!

hi @snailboat

2:30 PM

Hello!

Taking a quick look at GB, I think I don't like it very much.

It's interesting anyway, and I shouldn't be too quick to judge, though.

Actually there is a lot of theory inside GB.

nods -- But its assumption, that the grammar of any particular language is common to all languages, sounds odd to me.

Yes I noticed that as well :-)

But it could be true at some level, e.g. in biology we can say, the structure of any specific living thing is common to all living things.

And so we got DNA!

Anonymous

You can use ideas from generative grammar theories without buying the universal grammar bit

2:40 PM

nods

I never knew that this sentence is wrong - Every city (that) John has lived was ugly.

too confusing :O

while every place is common.

Oh, I thought you meant the tense!

I never noticed that :D

But come to think of it, yes, I think we don't say John lives this city.

Every city that John has lived in...?

Anonymous

2:44 PM

Yes it needs in

nods -- I guess with in, it would be fine.

Every place that John has lived (in) was...?

The was part made me think, but I think it's acceptable in casual conversations.

Ah

drop has :-)

Anonymous

2:46 PM

Yes, with place the in is optional

how we know this :O I mean how to judge it grammatically?

I don't know how, but I think hearing lots of utterances helps.

hmm true

How could I think "I think we don't say John lives this city."? I think the simplest answer is I've never heard anyone say that before.

true

I just believed so far that "that" there in those type of sentences (where it introduces a relative clause) can make the preposition optional.

2:50 PM

John lives (in) that place....?

As a non-native speaker, I think two forces are always at work: what we've read or heard, and those rules we've been taught or learned.

Like - The ice cream that the kid was asking (for) is not so tasty.

@Choko I think, yes, though I wonder if I've ever heard lives in that place before. But a phrase like "We are all in this place together [to/for ...]" is not rare.

@Man_From_India Is for optional?

Anonymous

No, *John lives that place is ungrammatical—we need in there

Ohhh

The for is not optional, right?

2:55 PM

I also wonder if I've ever heard X lives [in|] this/that place, ever!

Possibly because lives {here|there} overrules it.

@DamkerngT. now that makes me wonder. hmmm not optional, i think. ask for is a phrasal verb. So it has to have a for there.

Anonymous

The for is not optional in Man from India's sentence about ice cream

No I should not read any more now :-)

live + in + place >> how about "I don't want to live in a place like this"

That sounds perfect to me.

3:03 PM

or "I've always dreamed of living in a place like Buckingham Palace"

:-) A nice dream!

but "I have no place to live (in)"

Oh, indeed!

@snailboat I know it's a bad request, considering the size of the pdf, but if you are free anytime, can you please take a look at this? I was looking for this answer for a long time, but I don't know these theories (I believe you already know :-)) Is that pdf worth reading, I mean does it says how to judge if NPs can be used as an adverbial or not.

semlab5.sbs.sunysb.edu/~rlarson/larson85bnps.pdf

But this in is not optional, I think: I want a box to hide in. (from James Thurber's)

3:05 PM

I want a box to hide would mean

I want a box to hide sounds strange at best.

you want to hide a box

Yes!

"I want a box to hide!" "Here it is!" (wondering why he asked for it)

haha

yes...now i understand reading a lot about theories apart from electronics is not my "cup of ice cream" :D

3:08 PM

@Man_From_India Eh? I think you're on the right track already.

:D

imagining a cup of ice cream... yummy!

Here is my little secret... between a cup and a cone (of ice cream), I always pick the cup!

he he

a cup of ice cream

(or a bucket?)

Wow! That's a really big cup!

3:20 PM

Strange thing it's considered correct - I will have lived every place (not every city) that John has lived.

Now this is too bad :-(

Sounds similar to a typical threat: I'll have everything you own

And based on that example sentence the author says if that sentence is correct we can write the following sentence -

> Every place (not city) that John has lived was ugly.

I always thought live in every place/city was correct, without in that is incorrect.

Maybe it's related to the whose each question!

:O

I thought answer is hidden to that pdf :D

:-)

3:28 PM

I'm BACK! (Oh no)

I don't know!

welcome back :-)

Hi!

22 seconds later?

What the heck!

U have been pushed further back down the priority queue :D

(u know electronic processors use priority queue)

3:31 PM

Huh?

oh nothing :-) just joking :-)

Oh my god, for explaining the word "clinical" we have a bounty :O

Anonymous

3:55 PM

@Man_From_India Sorry, I'm here, but I'm sort of multi-tasking

Anonymous

@Man_From_India This paper is more recent and has a list of relevant references if you'd like to read further: uuair.lib.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/10241/6340/1/…

Anonymous

(I'm linking more for the list of references than for the paper itself)

Q: what shape are french fries?

1

I would like to know what shape are french fries? For e.g, onion rings are circular shaped, sandwiches are triangular shaped so how would I described the shape of a french gry. The context I want to use it is something like this, Let's say I am cooking food with someone, I have to tell them to...

word-request

Conclusion: Hellion loves food English.

Anonymous

@Catija Thanks for updating your answer about anosmia! I'd upvote, but I already upvoted before you edited it :-)

Hullo @snail! Can I see that answer?

Anonymous

4:05 PM

Yes!

4:15 PM

@snailboat thanks reading...

@MARamezani I think it's that smell answer.

@snailboat Wait a second...I was asking for the link!

@DamkerngT. Scratching head

Q: Olfactory disability put in words

1

I just saw a joke that made me think. Disability regarding sight: blindness (being blind) Disability regarding hearing: deafness (being deaf) Disability regarding smell: ??? (being ???) What would that be called? As a bonus question - what would be the equivalent for all the remaining two se...

word-choice

Found it!

Anonymous

@MARamezani I know, but I thought it'd be funnier if I said yes :-)

@snailboat Well, I thought you were looking for the link....

...But I got distracted too easy.

@DamkerngT. I remembered that once upon a time I wondered this myself.

Q: it's easy to do -- what's the term we use to call "it" when it's used as the subject of a sentence, but has no real antecedent?

4:26 PM

I guess you'd already known the answer. ;-)

0

Could you please remind me what term linguists and the grammar people use to call it when it's used as a subject pronoun, but the funky thing is that it doesn't really refer to anything particular unlike he or she that usually refer back to a person or an animal. In grammar-speak they say that it...

grammar

Possibly a duplicate...

But I'm too lazy to look...

it's 1:30am here

good night

(-.-)ノシ

Sleep tight!