English Language Learners

Freddy

6:39 AM

@Iplodman That's HTML, I used to use sublime text for that.

Hanaa

11:08 AM

Hi!

Damkerng T.

11:28 AM

@Hanaa Hi!

Man_From_India

12:16 PM

Hi @Hanaa

hello @DamkerngT.

Damkerng T.

4:12 PM

@Man_From_India @Man_From_India Hello!

Man_From_India

hi...why it's so silent today? :-O

Damkerng T.

Dunno.

:D

I just came in (to see what condition my condition was in). :-)

Man_From_India

he he...

Damkerng T.

(It's a cool song, btw, Just Dropped In.)

►

Man_From_India

i will listen to it...

btw we were talking about to infinitive in cleft sentence the other day

Damkerng T.

4:15 PM

Yes. I remember that.

Man_From_India

I passed on some wrong info that day

Damkerng T.

What was the wrong info?

Man_From_India

I said that day when 8do* is there, the to is optional, and when there is other verb to is mandatory

like what I wan to do is read a book

to answer this question I checked some books and other answers

Damkerng T.

Oh, yeah, you mentioned that do is special.

Man_From_India

0

A: "All you should do is [infinitive]" vs "All you should do is to [infinitive]"

Short Answer All you should do is study hard. All you should do is to study hard. Both of the sentences are correct. The to is optional here. Long Answer The sentence quoted is the example of pseudo-cleft sentence. A pseudo-cleft has a fused relative construction defining a variabl...

Yes John Lawer gave some explanation for that...in a comment...but Iam unable to understand it :(

I asked for clarification

let me share it

@Man_From_India: In the first one, I would use to get, but if "get a house for free" is a slogan in context, that would turn it into a noun phrase, so no to is needed. I dunno; hafta look at the context. It's not a normal sentence. In the second one the to is indeed optional. The difference is the do pro-verb in the first clause -- it must be matched by an infinitive in the second clause, but since do is a modal complement, it lacks to, and that state can -- optionally -- carry over by conjunction reduction to the second clause. — John Lawler 32 mins ago

and it's not true that for other verbs to is mandatory...it all depends on the verbs of the fused relative clause

Damkerng T.

4:20 PM

I think to is always optional for such clauses.

Most speakers will probably drop it (the to).

Man_From_India

Not always

for example in the following sentence to is mandatory

What would be better is to call them before hand.

Damkerng T.

Probably, sometimes it's hard to say why it sounds wrong.

nods

Compare: What I want is (to) call them earlier.

Man_From_India

The link I shared with you and this one explains how to decide

7

Q: Is this construction correct "what it does is to ..."

For these expressions What a paper shredder does is tearing the paper/tear the paper in small pieces which can be easily disposed. What he wants to do is to become/become a ballplayer. Which of these two forms is correct here to become/become, tearing/tear?

@DamkerngT. Here to is compulsory...

And taking help from all these answers and books I have written an answer to the bounty question :-) not sure how it is :-) but I tried to make it clear...

Damkerng T.

Interesting.

Man_From_India

let me tell you why it's mandatory in your sentence

Damkerng T.

4:25 PM

Other answers seem to try to treat do as a special case, StoneyB's answer doesn't (afaict).

But he had this:

> And when you move the pieces around to create what grammarians call cleft constructions, like your What sentences, you have to follow the requirements of the verb, as in What he wants ... is to become.

Oh, he mentioned do in the last paragraph.

Man_From_India

yes...true...and I asked him in the comment what is going on about it...he suggested me to not to consider it special

and I am curiously waiting for John lawer's explanation

Damkerng T.

Oh, wait. If that's the real reason behind this, it means that this is wrong.

> What the paper shredder does is to tear the paper into small pieces.

(Which doesn't sound wrong to me.)

I wonder if the rule is that strict.

Maybe it's changing. (Like opposite to, a lot of people find it sounding off without to.)

Man_From_India

At first that is what I thought...but stonyB said in general we can use the rule even with do, in colloquial or speech it's optional...

you can find the conversation below his answer

Damkerng T.

But his answer suggests that What the paper shredder does is to tear the paper into small pieces is incorrect.

Man_From_India

yes that is what it indicates

Damkerng T.

4:30 PM

Because it's based on the idea that Yes, the paper shredder does cut the paper into small pieces is correct.

Man_From_India

hmm

i haven't found any answers which deal with this kind of thing...i mean with do

Only John Lawer explains this

@Man_From_India: In the first one, I would use to get, but if "get a house for free" is a slogan in context, that would turn it into a noun phrase, so no to is needed. I dunno; hafta look at the context. It's not a normal sentence. In the second one the to is indeed optional. The difference is the do pro-verb in the first clause -- it must be matched by an infinitive in the second clause, but since do is a modal complement, it lacks to, and that state can -- optionally -- carry over by conjunction reduction to the second clause. — John Lawler 45 mins ago

Damkerng T.

I think the real answer behind this could be like other things in language. It sounds wrong because nobody's said it before.

Man_From_India

That can be possible.

But did you get the explanation what John gave in that comment about do being optional

?

Damkerng T.

It seems like JL and StoneyB hold different positions when it comes to these edge cases.

Which part didn't you understand?

Man_From_India

" In the second one the to is indeed optional. The difference is the do pro-verb in the first clause -- it must be matched by an infinitive in the second clause, but since do is a modal complement, it lacks to, and that state can -- optionally -- carry over by conjunction reduction to the second clause"

Damkerng T.

4:34 PM

So based on JL,

Man_From_India

The example sentence is What you must do is (to) apply for special leave

Damkerng T.

> *All they want is get a house for free. (It needs to.)

Man_From_India

correct

Damkerng T.

> What you must do is (to) apply for special leave.

I think it's basically the same idea explained by StoneyB.

(Think of the canonical form first, that is.)

> All they want is (to?) get a house for free. --> They want to get a house for free.

> What you must do is (to?) apply for special leave. --> You must apply for special leave.

That's why he thought to in the first one is mandatory.

What's strange for me is, why to in the second example is optional. (It looks like it's forbidden to me.)

Man_From_India

I asked JL for clarification of his explanation. Till then let's wait :-)

Damkerng T.

4:40 PM

(It this kind of analysis is the reason. But probably it's not all of the reasons, because to-infinitive is common as a complement of be.)

@Man_From_India I wonder if he can guess what point you want him to clarify.

Man_From_India

He should, because he just explained in the previous comment the reason. and I said I didn't get, and asked for some clarification. Let's see what he comes up with.

Damkerng T.

He's a very good guesser with piercing insights, as a linguistic professor would be, in any case.

Man_From_India

I have seen some of his answers, he is really nice. Most of them though I can't understand, but whatever I can understand is really good answers.

Damkerng T.

I didn't mean he guess what he answers, I mean he can guess what his students ask very well, btw. :-)

Man_From_India

yes I got that :-D :-D

Damkerng T.

4:47 PM

I always thought that to was optional. I just simply usually say it.

Man_From_India

Yes I remember that day you mentioned using to is safer.

Damkerng T.

(Or sometimes I might turn it into the -ing form: All they want is getting this house for free.)

Man_From_India

yes there should not be any chance of being incorrect :-)

Damkerng T.

lol -- Probably true. :D

Man_From_India

Yes because the complement is a NP now :-)

Damkerng T.

4:55 PM

Oh, All Is Lost is probably an adult version of Life of Pi.

Man_From_India

In that adult version is their a tiger? :-O

Damkerng T.

Nope. But a man is only by himself in his lifeboat.

Man_From_India

interesting...

Damkerng T.

If I understand the movie right, there was no real tiger in Life of Pi. It was just his persona.

I still don't know whether bananas float. :D

That's a big question I got from watching the movie. :D

Man_From_India

:-D

I haven't seen it very seriously, because I find it rather boring

the other day I was watching an old movie Before sunset.

Damkerng T.

5:00 PM

I had read its novel version before, so I was kind of curious.

Oh, I can remember now. Life of Pi is another book that I read in one sitting.

@Man_From_India I love that one!

Oh, wait, there are two of them, I think. Before Sunrise and Before Sunset.

Man_From_India

One thing I have noticed a movie based on a novel can't do justice to the book. I don't know about Life of Pie. Because I haven't read the book. But in many cases that is what I ahve noticed

Damkerng T.

I can't remember which is which, but I like the first one a little better. (The second one is when their paths crossed over again 10 years later.)

@Man_From_India nods -- I think this one is quite okay. Its visual is quite stunning if you asked me. And it was done rather sincerely, to the original novel, I mean.

Oh, Before Sunrise was from 1995, Before Sunset was released in 2004.

Both are more than decent movies.

Man_From_India

I watched the one when the male character had an interview after his book hit the bestsellerlist and then he met his lost lady love

Damkerng T.

That's the "10 years later" one (Before Sunset).

Man_From_India

I have read the fault in our star novel and watched the movie as well. I think that movie is not bad. Quite good.

Damkerng T.

5:08 PM

Oh, I didn't know that it was a novel before.

Man_From_India

If you watch only the movie The Kite runner you will like it, but if you read the book first and then watch the movie you will hate the movie :-)

Yes The fault in our star by John Green

Damkerng T.

Ahh... Got it. You mean movies from novels in general.

Man_From_India

yes

Damkerng T.

But hey, we have a really long running of Harry Potter. We have 7 of them!

Man_From_India

I can't comment on that...because I am not a Harry Potter fan...my ex-gf was a huge fan and she could not bring me to read or watch it :-)

Damkerng T.

5:10 PM

lol!

Man_From_India

Even when she uploads her pics she put a harry potter quote as a tagline...you know how disturbing it is...first of all she is now X...and harry potter :-)

unfriend :-)

Damkerng T.

Hah!

Man_From_India

harry potter is obviously not the reason though...it happens :-) strange thing :-)

Damkerng T.

Aww... We can't tell what lies ahead for us.

Man_From_India

yea...

Damkerng T.

5:14 PM

(Or as Gump said: Life is like a chocolate box. :-)

Man_From_India

except astrologers :-D

Damkerng T.

Hello @Freddy!

Hehe!

Man_From_India

hi @Freddy

Freddy

@DamkerngT. Hi

@Man_From_India hello

Damkerng T.

@Freddy How is it going today?

Freddy

5:15 PM

Great, thanks. What about you?

Damkerng T.

Nothing exciting for me. :D

Thanks!

Freddy

@Man_From_India From which part of India are you from?

Man_From_India

Currently in Bangalore :-)

Where are you from @Freddy?

Freddy

Jamnagar, Gujarat

Man_From_India

Oh you are also a man from india :-)

By the way @DamkerngT. there was no real tiger in Life of Pi? You mean it symbolizes his fear only?

Damkerng T.

5:22 PM

I think he made the Tiger (Parker, I think) his own persona in order to survive.

Richard Parker was much tougher than himself, and could do the unthinkable of him in his normal life.

Man_From_India

hmm

Damkerng T.

If I understand his metaphors correctly, I think the Orangutan never left the boat.

Man_From_India

:-O

Damkerng T.

Remember that floating island?

Man_From_India

ahh yes..

Damkerng T.

5:27 PM

I think that's our Orangutan.

Man_From_India

visual beauty...

Damkerng T.

Yes. Everything in the alternate version is beautiful.

Man_From_India

Philosophical but indeed true

Okay have to go offline. Time to go to bed. Goodnight @DamkerngT. and @Freddy

Damkerng T.

Good night! See you soon!

1

Q: A sentence in Present tense was understood as future tense

I came across a Chinese web site selling skirts and then paid for two skirts in different colors. After I had paid for the skirts, I sent a short message to them: please let me know when you send them to me. And the Chinese seller made this reply to me: I don't know when will send to you. ...

meaning-in-context grammaticality

Oh, that's kinda tricky.

> Please let me know when you send them to me.
Please let me know when you will send them to me.

I think both are correct but have different meanings.

Anonymous

6:25 PM

@DamkerngT. Lately people have referred to Japanese Language.SE as "JL"

Anonymous

I can mentally resolve JL to John Lawler in context

Anonymous

But it takes more time than it used to due to the ambiguity

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. Yes!

Anonymous

And, quite possibly, different grammar.

Anonymous

> When you send them to me, please let me know.
> ?*When you will send them to me, please let me know.

Hanaa

6:34 PM

Hi!

Damkerng T.

6:47 PM

@snailboat Oh, sorry for the confusion!

@Hanaa Hi!

I wish Chinese companies would document their products more accurately.

mt-viki.com/EN/products/KVM_Series/PS_2_KVM_SWITCH/2014/0708/…

It's a KVM (keyboard-video-mouse) switcher.

> FEATURES:
● Auto switch. Also via push button.
...
PC Selection: Push Button

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. Oh, that's okay! No need to apologize :-)

Damkerng T.

Do you think we can select PC with hotkeys besides the push button?

Anonymous

I can't tell!

Anonymous

You might be able to tell if there are reviews...

Anonymous

I'm used to scroll lock x2

Damkerng T.

6:51 PM

I guess it could, because its model is: 4 PORT AUTO KVM SWITCH (MT-471S).

@snailboat I'm used to that, too!

Anonymous

I frankly have no idea what "auto switch" means

Damkerng T.

The word AUTO is a big hint.

Anonymous

My best guess would be that, like the one I have here, it automatically switches to whichever one is on, if only one is on

Damkerng T.

Yep. That's what I guessed too.

But I wasn't sure. And it's hard to find anyone's review because it's made in China. :D

Luckily, I finally found this: fixya.com/support/…

> Turns out if I double tap and hold the scroll lock key, the kvm rapid beeps and while in this mode, I can hit the numbers 1 to 4 to pick the port I want to connect to.

Anonymous

Interesting!

Damkerng T.

6:53 PM

So, its product page doesn't mention the product's features.

Anonymous

Though I'd prefer an interface that doesn't make me wait, if possible

Damkerng T.

(Or at least not all the features.)

I guess they could double Scroll Lock + N at once without having to wait for the beep.

On product pages by most sellers, it's very confusing. Some claim only Push Button, some claim both Push Button and Hotkeys!

I look into this because my old one is about to break, I think. One VGA port turns off and sometimes displays nothing at all randomly.

I guess I have too many old stuff. :D

Oh, oh, about the keyboard, I decide to give this a try:

Microsoft Comfort Curve 3000

Let's see if it will work for me. :D

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. I keep a lot of stuff as long as it'll possibly last :-)

Damkerng T.

Me too. Too bad that these electronics gadgets don't last as long as I wish.

(Or I hope.)

My old KVM is probably 8yo.

Oh, no! The page I bookmarked yesterday for the keyboard says "out of stock"!

Who bought it before me, I'd like to know!

Anonymous

7:12 PM

D'oh!

Damkerng T.

Hehe!

9

Q: Usage of "eyeglasses" and "glasses"

I heard in some movies "I lost my glasses" (eyeglasses), but if I insert this word into search, this return some jars, bottles. Is it wrong? In a conversation I must use "eyeglasses", or "glasses" is enough? There is a difference between American and British English? "I want to buy glasses." ...

word-usage

Interesting!

@δοῦλος It's definitely 'fine', in the sense that people will get your meaning, but it will probably reinforce the perception that you're not familiar with the language, as most native speakers use the shortened 'glasses'. — DCShannon 20 hours ago

So if I used eyeglasses, it would mean that I weren't familiar with the language?

Come to think of it, it's probably similar in Thai. Sometimes I call my eyeglasses แว่น (which is approx. glasses, but this word has nothing to do with the sense of "glass" it has the sense of "a tool that helps us see", among other things), sometimes I call my eyeglasses แว่นตา (แว่น + ตา, ตา ~ eye).

Hanaa

7:56 PM

Hi!

Damkerng T.

Hi, again!

:D

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. wasn't

Anonymous

I don't think eyeglasses communicates anything negative about the speaker

Damkerng T.

@snailboat Thanks!