English Language Learners

happenask

12:11 AM

hi

Damkerng T.

12:54 AM

@snailboat That's a great explanation!

Damkerng T.

1:06 AM

Another difficult to analyze sentence: "I tell you what."

Hello @fahdijbeli @happenask!

Anonymous

= "I'll tell you what" with will dropped

Anonymous

But it's an idiom, so analyzing what may not be helpful

Damkerng T.

I'd rather not analyze that! :-)

Anonymous

(But you could analyze it if you wanted to--it's not that mysterious)

Damkerng T.

Hmm... First off, I'm not even sure what this what is.

It looks like a pronoun, but is it really one?

happenask

1:09 AM

as i know , most american normally use idiom

Anonymous

Speakers of all natural languages use idioms.

Damkerng T.

nods -- I usually understand it as a whole. It just occurred to me that I don't really know what this what is, grammatically. :)

Anonymous

"Oh, he ate something already? I wonder what." "I'll tell you what. He ate grilled leeks."

Anonymous

There's the same phrase, but used literally rather than as an idiom

Anonymous

The difference is that it's not clear what what refers to when it's used as an idiom.

Damkerng T.

1:13 AM

nods -- But your what refers back, while that idiomatic what refers forward.

Hah! You really can read my mind. :)

Anonymous

But grammatically it's no different, really

Damkerng T.

Ahh

Hmm... Grilled leeks... That makes me hungry. :D

Anonymous

I made fried rice earlier.

Anonymous

It was pretty tasty!

Damkerng T.

Now, I'm really hungry. :)

Anonymous

1:18 AM

My basic ingredients are jasmine rice, soy sauce, onions and garlic, broccoli, and eggs.

Anonymous

Plus some seasoning.

Damkerng T.

Wow! That sounds delicious!

I'd better go eat something. :)

Anonymous

Enjoy! :-)

happenask

i like noodle

Damkerng T.

Thanks!

happenask

1:20 AM

when i worked in u.s army , i saw many american enjoy eating noodle

Anonymous

Many Americans enjoy eating noodles.

Anonymous

I do.

Anonymous

That includes Italian noodles, which are the sort I grew up with, but I also had Japanese, Chinese, and Korean noodles when I got older

Anonymous

I didn't learn to use chopsticks until I was a teenager

Damkerng T.

1:34 AM

Chopsticks are the best for noodles, wontons, and kyosa!

> meta.ell.stackexchange.com/questions/1146/…

Ahh, tags are quite tricky.

> Kitzhaber, a 67-year-old Democrat who has come under political attack on the issue as he seeks a fourth term, has been trading blame with Oracle over the failure to create a website that Oregonians could use to enroll in health coverage under President Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act.

> ell.stackexchange.com/questions/31625/…

I'd say that that as has to be read as "because" because of the tenses. (I think the present perfect would sound a bit in conflict with the present tense of as if we tried to read as as "at the same time".)

Damkerng T.

Aww... This question was deleted!

> ell.stackexchange.com/questions/31738/…

I think I've seen both the X file and the file X.

I guess the more X sounds like adjective, the more likely the first alternative is. The latter is more likely when X sounds like a title.

Anonymous

I couldn't figure out how to answer it to the OP's satisfaction as written

Anonymous

I left a comment asking for more information

Damkerng T.

nods -- Has the OP asked the same question again, or they just deleted it?

Anonymous

"or did they just delete it"

Anonymous

1:42 AM

I don't know, I didn't check

Anonymous

I didn't mean to discourage them

Damkerng T.

TYftC!

Anonymous

1. [Has the OP asked the same question again] or [did they just delete it]?
2. Has the OP [asked the same question again] or [just deleted it]?

Anonymous

Yours was kind of in the middle :-)

Damkerng T.

It was kind of an afterthought. :)

Anonymous

1:46 AM

Like:

Anonymous

Has the OP asked the same question again? Or... they just deleted it?

Anonymous

Like shifting gears.

Damkerng T.

nods

Anonymous

That's understandable, then

Anonymous

It didn't read quite like that to me, but I tried to force that interpretation with punctuation and such :-)

Damkerng T.

1:48 AM

I planned to type a question mark after again, but once I reached there, I felt like I wanted to clarify it a bit.

Now I know a good way to ~~phrase~~ type this kind of my afterthoughts. :)

Anonymous

Somehow I feel like there should be a separation between or and they if you're going to put a declarative question after an interrogative question

Anonymous

Because it needs to feel like it starts a new sentence to me if you're going to switch to declarative

Anonymous

Or um, since "sentence" is kind of a nebulous unit

Anonymous

It needs to feel more disconnected than it does

Damkerng T.

I think I wasn't gonna pause there, between or and they. Hmm... Would that make it sound less natural?

Anonymous

1:50 AM

Maybe. I've been staring too hard and it and have lost my ability to make intuitive judgments :-)

Damkerng T.

Hehe. Thanks anyway. :-)

Anonymous

But when I first read it definitely sounded off to me.

Damkerng T.

nods

Ahh... I think it's very likely for me to insert maybe between or and there, "Has the OP asked the same question again? Or maybe they just deleted it."

Anonymous

Hey, you changed it from a declarative question to a declarative statement :-)

Anonymous

I like your maybe.

Damkerng T.

1:56 AM

It had been my intention. :)

Anonymous

When did your intention change? :-)

Anonymous

("It had been my intention [until ...]")

Anonymous

Do you ever feel like I'm giving you a hard time? 'Cause I don't mean to be :-)

Damkerng T.

Nope.

Anonymous

Yay!

Damkerng T.

1:57 AM

Oh, I had to wait 10 secs, before I can see the character I typed!

I was going to say It was my intention and then I thought "That might be ambiguous."

Maybe, saying "I haven't changed my intention" is better.

What I really was trying to say in "It had been ..." was that that was what I wanted to say the first time.

Anonymous

Ahh :-)

Anonymous

I figured.

Anonymous

Actually, it's pretty rare for you to say something I actually don't understand.

Anonymous

If I respond like that, I'm almost always trying to point out a slight difference of interpretation :-)

Damkerng T.

Ah, thanks. I take it that this time I succeeded. :)

Anonymous

2:02 AM

You pretty much always succeed at communicating in English, it seems

Anonymous

I just have fun quibbling about stuff in here, since it's an English language chat :-)

Damkerng T.

It's quite fun indeed!

I wish I could spend time reading today's ELL questions.

Anonymous

I haven't read many ELL questions in a while.

Damkerng T.

A bit sad. :(

By the way, while we have many movies titled "28 something", I have 28 tabs.

Anonymous

2:34 AM

@DamkerngT. Well, I've contributed a lot of time to ELL.

Anonymous

I should really just block the site off for a while and focus on certain other things :-)

Anonymous

But right now I'm leaving occasional comments here and there and it isn't taking way too much of my time.

Anonymous

So I guess it's okay.

Maulik V

5:24 AM

@DamkerngT. you there

@snailboat you there?

Oh, I read your last message here now. @snailboat that's okay, You may proceed with your other work.

Maulik V

6:15 AM

@Nico hi

Nico

hi

Maulik V

An article issue, again!

Will you help me?

Nico

I can try

Maulik V

yahoo.com/tech/…

The last sentence of the first paragraph

"The post was created by scammers looking to make a quick buck off the tragic death of a beloved entertainer."

I'm pretty sure that it should be the beloved entertainer. Sentence like this

take the definite article

I remember all news that mentioned the pop singer when MJ died

What say?

Nico

I think the version with "a beloved entertainer" implies that the same type of scam has been attempted using the death of other beloved entertainers.

Maulik V

6:28 AM

That is highly unlikely, I guess.

But at very first glimpse, it is clear to use "the", isn't it?

Nico

why do you think unlikely?

I haven't read the original text, so I don't know if my interpreation fits the text.

Maulik V

Because here, it talks about the beloved entertainer RW not anybody else. The tragic death and beloved entertainer are linked to RW.

Nico

Just to be clear, I'm not claiming "the" is wrong there. I'm claiming "a" is possible and I've given an interpreation for it.

Anonymous

A is fine.

Anonymous

@Nico I don't think it implies that.

Anonymous

6:35 AM

@MaulikV I am here

Nico

what does the use "a" imply?

assuming it does

do 2the" and "a" mean the same in that conext?

Anonymous

@Nico No, but either is okay.

Anonymous

The difference between the two would make a good ELL question.

Nico

To me "a" there is generic, whereas "the" identifies RW uniquely".

Anonymous

@Nico That sounds reasonable, even though we all know the beloved entertainer in question was Robin Williams.

Nico

6:42 AM

Now the question would be why one would choose "a" over "the"

Anonymous

I would choose a over the.

Anonymous

I think you could start by asking what the difference is.

Nico

I did

Anonymous

I mean, what you said is reasonable, but it's not a complete description.

Nico

ok

Anonymous

6:44 AM

@MaulikV If you wanted to ask about the difference between a and the in this sentence, I would upvote it (as long as your question doesn't claim that the is the correct choice―I think both are possible). It's a good question.

Nico

I guess @MaulikV can do the honours and post the question

Maulik V

Fine

Anonymous

Although I think it's difficult to answer.

Anonymous

Which is why I've refrained from giving an off-the-cuff response here :-)

Nico

Oh, I have cuffs big enough :p

Anonymous

6:46 AM

Right now I'm practicing guitar and taking micro-breaks where I use my computer. Sticking to short intervals of practice helps you stay focused, but you have to keep the breaks short too, or you might end up not getting any practice done :-)

Nico

how short is hsort?

and howlong are the intervals?

Maulik V

@snailboat what all you do? Japanese, English, Guitar, Snails... :)

Anonymous

I have many hats.

Anonymous

1

Q: Article Confusion Again! Why is there an 'a' instead of a 'the'?

Articles give me a lot of pain! Here is the latest one. From the Yahoo! News page - Have you seen Facebook posts claiming to link to a video message that actor Robin Williams made before his death earlier this week? Do not click on it — the video does not exist. The post was created by scamm...

Anonymous

Upvoted! :-)

Maulik V

6:52 AM

thanks...

@snailboat I precisely mentioned the tragic death now..don't you think it better takes the?

We are talking about that particular case

Anonymous

The tragic death is better than a tragic death in this sentence.

Anonymous

A beloved entertainer is better than the beloved entertainer in this sentence (but both are okay)

F.E.

7:38 AM

. . . yawn . . .

Damkerng T.

8:46 AM

much with uncountable nouns? I see much point in arguing about that! :P — Maulik V 4 hours ago

many with countable nouns? The same point I discussed with a grammarian while trying many fine wines in his house :P — Maulik V 4 hours ago

I would argue that between countable and uncountable, that much point is uncountable, and wines is countable.

Anonymous

9:06 AM

The thing is, nouns can't just be dropped into count and non-count buckets.

Anonymous

Individual uses of them can be put into those buckets, though.

Anonymous

I could go to a restaurant with a friend and order "two waters, please"

Anonymous

Sure, water is typically a non-count noun.

Anonymous

But it's certainly a count noun in the example I just gave.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. I think you're right!

Anonymous

9:12 AM

@DamkerngT. It might be interesting to point out that much in this usage is a Negative Polarity Item.

Anonymous

> *I see much point in that.
> I don't see much point in that.

Damkerng T.

Ah, yes. That was another point I noticed, too.

Anonymous

Dangit - question closed just as I tried to post. Short answer: substitute male pronouns & match the endings. You would say: "The letter is for HIM." HIM ends in "m", so technically "WHOM" is correct. "WHOSE letter is this?" "It is HIS" (match the "s"). You would NOT say "The letter is for HE." That would be incorrect, and has no "m" so "WHO" is also technically incorrect. That said, few people these days would say "for WHOM is the letter meant?" It's too proper & stuffy. Most would ask "who is the letter for?" This is technically incorrect, but far more common. — mc01 Aug 15 at 17:57

Anonymous

@mc01 If you check your friendly neighborhood reference grammar, I'm afraid you'll find that's not how it works at all. — snailplane 19 secs ago

Anonymous

Do I need to go into more detail?

Damkerng T.

9:23 AM

Probably into the detail about which friendly neighborhood reference grammar. :)

Anonymous

Any? :-)

Damkerng T.

Hee

How recent is it that people started using colloquial who for formal whom?

Or it always is just like that.

Anonymous

The history of who and whom is too complicated for me to accurately describe off the top of my head, but...

Anonymous

You might find this interesting: itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/004084.html

Damkerng T.

It's interesting that the article has "You saw WHAT?!"...

and I think its intonation would be pretty much the same as "I'll tell you what."

Anonymous

9:30 AM

An in-situ wh-question.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. Not for me!

Damkerng T.

Hmm... Suppose that that WHAT is not in all-caps.

Anonymous

Typical polar (yes-no) questions have rising intonation "Did you eat the cake?"

Anonymous

Typical wh-questions do not "What's your name?"

Damkerng T.

nods

Anonymous

9:32 AM

In-situ wh-questions often do "You saw what?"

Damkerng T.

What about "I'll tell you what."?

Anonymous

Not rising

Anonymous

Falling or suspended intonation

Damkerng T.

Hah! I thought it was typically rising at the end.

Anonymous

Oh, if you said "I'll tell you what" with rising intonation at the end, it would sound like I was asking what I'd be telling you :-)

Damkerng T.

9:34 AM

nods -- Somehow the context I'm thinking of is a bit like that. -- "Guess what I'm going to tell you. (And I'm going to tell you that, anyway.)"

But on the second thought, I think "I'll tell you what" with falling tone is also at least as common.

Anonymous

"When I'm through with you, you'll tell me the secret of the golden hamster." "Wait. I'll tell you what?" ← rising intonation

Damkerng T.

Now I'm wondering if I really ever heard a rising "I'll tell you what." :-)

Anonymous

I'm sorry, I had a hard time making up a context for the rising intonation version :-)

Anonymous

But it's okay. I had a chance to use a Unicode arrow. And that makes it all better.

Damkerng T.

> "You don't believe me? I'll tell you what. Let's have a bet."

(Robert De Niro's face somehow just flashed up in my mind.)

Anonymous

9:40 AM

@DamkerngT. I think rising intonation would be possible but not the basic intonation pattern

Anonymous

I think it would still be distinguishable from question intonation, though.

Damkerng T.

nods -- I think it's a bit different, but to me it's rising too. Hmm... Intonation is hard.

Nico

I've accepted this answer because it does answer my question, especially after considering sentences 3 and 4. But... :) I believe you cheated with sentences 1 and 2: the Head of "over a year" is the noun "year" and "over a" is a PP functioning as a determiner (at least that's how Bas Aarts would do the analyses in Section 5.2.1.3 of his grammar). — Nico 1 min ago

Anonymous

9:55 AM

@Nico Certain PPs have a distribution rather more like other types of phrase.

Anonymous

I could refer to the house across the street as simply across the street

Nico

> I'm referring to the house across the street

> ?I'm referring to across the street

Anonymous

Well, I didn't say in every possible sentence. :-)

Nico

:)

Anonymous

You can use various strategies to try to explain the non-PP-like distribution of what appear to be PPs in form

Anonymous

9:57 AM

However you choose to do it in terms of theory, they're rather exceptional

Nico

I'm not clear what you want to argue. Do you believe "over a year" is PP?

Anonymous

@Nico In what sentence?

Nico

> 1) We spent [over a year] on this problem. - - [active voice]

> 2) [Over a year] was spent on this problem. - - [passive voice]

Anonymous

In this case I do think it would be easier to suggest that it's a NP and that over a forms a determinative phrase

Anonymous

I don't see a strong motivation to consider over the head

Anonymous

10:06 AM

The head of a phrase typically determines its syntactic function, typically can't be omitted, and selects its complements

Anonymous

Here it has a function that is atypical of a PP, so if we want to call it head we have to fit it into our framework by stretching the function of PPs and writing an exception into our rules

Anonymous

It seems like the most indispensible part here is year, and syntactically it seems to function like a NP

Anonymous

> [A year] was spent on this problem.
> [Over a year] was spent on this problem.

Nico

And "over" feels like it's modifiying "a" as in:

> Over two years

> Over two weeks

Anonymous

I'm not sure how it would change the meaning if it modified only two or modified all of two years

Anonymous

10:08 AM

It would work out to the same thing in my mind

Anonymous

We can argue that over here does select its complement, which would then be a NP, so we can fit it into that framework...

Nico

If it modified year then:

Anonymous

But I don't see a really compelling reason when we could simplify the function of the PP category

Anonymous

@Nico It couldn't modify year.

Nico

over a year = i.e. 1.5 year

Anonymous

10:09 AM

The choices are a or a year

Nico

over two years = 2 x 1.5 year = 3 year

@snailboat OK

Damkerng T.

> Not as long as or maybe just a bit shorter but not by much than two years was spent on this problem.

Hee

Contriving could be fun. :D

Anonymous

> Really quite close to over two years was spent on this problem.

Nico

:) My duties call me. Talk to you later.

Anonymous

> Almost, but not quite, entirely unlike over two years was spent on this problem.

Damkerng T.

10:14 AM

See you soon!

I'd say it's easier to read all of them as noun phrases.

Anonymous

But if we do that

Anonymous

We have to account for other PPs that function rather like other sorts of phrases, too.

Anonymous

Some of them we could account for by positing ellipsis.

Damkerng T.

My all of them was only about our examples above.

> High enough resolution is also correct. Resolution high enough is perfectly valid as well, but it requires a determiner of some sort for resolution; most likely the article a.

Interesting...

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. Hrm?

Damkerng T.

10:21 AM

> ell.stackexchange.com/a/31774/3281

Anonymous

> They confirmed the system fulfills its intended use, providing that the proper X with high enough resolution was used.

Anonymous

> They confirmed the system fulfills its intended use, providing that the proper X with resolution high enough was used.

Anonymous

> They confirmed the system fulfills its intended use, providing that the proper X with a high enough resolution was used.

Anonymous

> They confirmed the system fulfills its intended use, providing that the proper X with a resolution high enough was used.

Anonymous

shrug :-)

Anonymous

10:24 AM

Attributive or postpositive, count or non-count…

Anonymous

> They confirmed the system fulfills its intended use, providing that the proper X with high enough a resolution was used.

Damkerng T.

I think the first version is safer than others.

Anonymous

I kind of like 1, 3, and 5

Anonymous

But I am rather sleepy.

user116848

1:26 PM

So I just realized that boat is plane and plane is boat. I didn't know that Damks.

user116848

hehe

fahdijbeli

6:00 PM

hi

F.E.

7:23 PM

@Nico Moi, cheat? :D

Well, let's look at that expression: "over a year"

There could be: "over a bridge", "over a table", "over the water".

Those are similar in structure: [preposition NP]

"over/under a year", "over/under a table", etc.

Anonymous

Sometimes small edits seem to be rejected by the chat software, and I have no idea why. It's buggy…

F.E.

I had waited too long, I'm assuming.

The input box seems to "only" change my "cheat" into "chat" when I start the message with: Moi, cheat? -- Here, in this message, the word wasn't changed on me?!

I wonder if it's because I faked the input box into thinking I was writing French?

Anyhow . . . :)

Nico

7:40 PM

:)

F.E.

Oh, in researching the answer, I think I've found a slight discrepancy in CGEL as concerning the issue of prepositional verbs: the authors' definition in Chapter 16 might differ a bit with that used in Chapter 4. (Or, I could be misinterpreting them.)

user116848

Hey peeps :)

Nico

I think "over a year" is closer to "a year and a bit" than to "over a table"

Anonymous

@F.E. There was an interesting but unfortunate question recently on ELL

Anonymous

0

Q: "depend on" in relative clause

Collins Cobuild English Grammar says "If the verb in a relative clause is a phrasal verb ending with a preposition, you cannot move the preposition to the beginning of the clause." Macmillan says "depend on" is a phrasal verb. So is "I’m looking for an assistant on whom I can depend" wrong?

grammar relative-clauses

F.E.

7:43 PM

(cont.) Yes, the distribution of the expression as to how it functions in clauses, and the internal structure of the expression, are two major factors in categorizing that expression (e.g. as NP, PP, etc.).

@snailboat I had skimmed that question earlier . . . :)

user116848

Ahhhhh the search function sucks here.

Nico

@snailboat I remember you had a kind of canonical answer for phrasal verbs, let me see if i can find it.

Anonymous

@Nico Oh, um

Anonymous

No, that's okay :-)

Anonymous

It's not a canonical answer and I'm not sure it's really helpful to people

Nico

7:48 PM

11

A: When to add "up" after a verb and when not?

Phrasal verbs In your question, you give examples where a verb is used together with another word, and the combination has some idiomatic meaning. These are commonly called phrasal verbs†. For example, look at the definition given by Collins for the phrasal verb pick up. It gives a whopping s...

Anonymous

Just another dumb snailboat answer... :-)

Nico

It was to me

F.E.

@snailboat Yeah, there seems to be more to it than that. The specified preposition involved can be a mobile or a fixed specified preposition. And they behave quite differently. (CGEL page 276 [12] )

Anonymous

I always cringe when looking back on old answers

F.E.

(cont.) and the verb itself could be transitive or intransitive.

I just realized something: I might (recently) have been misinterpreting their use of intransitive in some of their explanations, where I had assumed they were referring to the preposition, but they might have been (or probably were) referring to the verb!? :( . . . :)

Gotta go and check and see if that is what had happened . . .

(cont.) Yup, I had mis-parsed it. Interestingly, all the other times that I had read it, I had parsed it correctly (their intended way). Weird. (e.g. transitive prepositional verbs)

Oh, look, more grammar threads to look at. :)

F.E.

8:16 PM

@snailboat What was the unfortunate part of it?

@Nico Compare: "They were fighting [over a table and a chair]"

Anonymous

> Macmillan says "depend on" is a phrasal verb.

Anonymous

They're treating "phrasal verb" as a coherent class.

Anonymous

Unfortunately, when I read questions and answers on ELL, I find the term "phrasal verb" used quite often but without a clear definition

user116848

Is there any way curmudgeon and hot tempered can be synonyms?

Anonymous

Not really.

Anonymous

8:27 PM

There might be some conceptual overlap.

user116848

Why?

Anonymous

But I don't think they're really interchangeable.

Anonymous

You could ask a question about the difference, if you liked.

user116848

But both these words are generally used 'for' males I guess

user116848

No I wouldn't bother asking it on the main site. Too many questions get "on hold" or "as off topic" these days. I only ask the ones that are very important to me somehow.

F.E.

8:38 PM

1

Q: What does "which" refer to?

Sentence : "The founder of Georgia, James Edward Oglethorpe, served as chairman of a committee charged with investigating prison conditions, which led him to take a special interest in the plight of debaters".

which

This type of question comes up a lot: what can supplementary relative clauses, er, modify or relate to.

Anonymous

Once, a certain user who shall remain nameless voted to closed one as off-topic because he felt the question of what which referred back to was not a matter of grammar

Anonymous

Oh, my mistake, he actually wrote "nothing to do with language"

Anonymous

Sometimes it's a struggle to keep on-topic questions open :-)

Anonymous

@Arrowfar You think so?

Anonymous

google.com/…

Anonymous

8:48 PM

When I hear hot-tempered, I don't have any association with gender one way or the other.

Anonymous

Curmudgeonly might more often describe an old man than an old woman, though.

F.E.

@snailboat Ah got a better one. In one ELU thread, there was a user who was declaring: "Grammar is very simple here, there are no syntactic rules involved," - - I win! :D

Anonymous

On Japanese.SE, someone has taken to calling nouns "nominatives"

Anonymous

What's funny is I almost didn't notice.

Anonymous

(The nouns in question have no case marking.)

Anonymous

8:54 PM

@Arrowfar Ah, I didn't realize you'd given up on the Stack Exchange model.

Anonymous

Well, "curmudgeon" brings to mind someone who's grumpy and old

Anonymous

"Hot tempered" does not

Anonymous

"Curmudgeonly" is someone who has a curmudgeon-like manner (though they may not be, for example, old, although they certainly may be)

user116848

@snailboat I haven't given up. I find this the case here. Although it is probably the only English site that I like.

Anonymous

Are you talking about ELL or ELU?

user116848

8:57 PM

Both

Anonymous

I think ELU in general is more close-happy.

Anonymous

That's one of the reasons I don't really participate over there.

Cerberus

Yeah it's close happy.

Anonymous

That's not to say people don't close questions on ELL as well.

Cerberus

One issue is that people (understandably) ask ELL questions on ELU.

Another is that we get many duplicates on ELU, partly because ELU is older and so has more questions to duplicate.

Anonymous

9:03 PM

Both true.

user116848

Yes, I understand what you guys are saying.

Nico

10:06 PM

@F.E. I will concede that there are arguments for "over a year" being either a NP or PP :)

Anonymous

10:34 PM

CGEL defines lexical categories somewhat nontraditionally, and the preposition category might be the biggest surprise, given that it combines a traditional label with something quite unlike the traditional analysis

Anonymous

Whereas, say, the determinative category is obviously nontraditional but also has a nontraditional name

Anonymous

So it's less like that you'd be familiar with determinatives as a part of speech and then be surprised by how they use the term

Anonymous

CGEL is very consistent in separating category from function, though, which I feel is one of the strongest points of their analysis

Cerberus

10:50 PM

Yes, I like terms like "determinative" for that reason: not confusing, and not an abbreviation. If you don't know what it means, at least you know that you don't know; and it is fairly easy to look up and to remember afterwards, as opposed to, say, PP.

Transcript for

English Language Learners