« first day (546 days earlier)      last day (353 days later) » 
00:00 - 18:0018:00 - 00:00

F.E.
F.E.
12:11 AM
@snailboat Hey, I can play that game too! :D
> It seemed only fair [ (that) he had returned the favor ].
I suspect the context is probably going to determine if a mandative reading or non-mandative reading is expected (in the OP's "original").
Even if a mandative reading is expected, the mandative clause probably won't be required to be subjunctive. A present tense in the mandative clause could be used in a covert mandative.
The version "It seemed only fair [ (that) he had returned the favor ]" could compete in some contexts with the version "It seemed only fair [ (that) he returned the favor ]", where the first version could be considered to be using a backshift.
Those last two versions would easily be non-mandative in reading.
For those versions using a plain present tense in the subordinate clause (er, mandative clause when it's a mandative), they could be ambiguous as to whether their construction is a mandative or non-mandative--especially when the sentence is taken in isolation; and of course, there's often the ambiguity between present and the plain form (for a subjunctive) when it's not 3rd person singular.
 
happenask
happenask
1:13 AM
hi good day!!!
 
 
4 hours later…
F.E.
F.E.
5:32 AM
. . . scratch . . .
 
user116848
5:48 AM
@F.E. Hi dude!
 
F.E.
F.E.
@Arrowfar What's up?
 
user116848
@F.E. Good. You? How are things?
 
F.E.
F.E.
Got some things done, and now have a little time to procrastinate.
 
user116848
So I have this question...May I?
 
F.E.
F.E.
Sure, as long as it's about grammar. :)
 
user116848
5:53 AM
@F.E. Will we follow this sentence with past or present (But I think usually present is used)----> "What you were saying was that he was/is going to......."?
 
user116848
Sorry was typing slow :)
 
F.E.
F.E.
Try to parse that sentence, by bolding the main verb, and by [xx] the LHS (subject) and the RHS (predicative complement). By doing that, that can help you in seeing stuff.
Also, you could then put that sentence into present tense, sorta, e.g. "[LHS] is [RHS]".
 
user116848
"He is....." right? What do you think. But I thought why don't we use backshifting in sentences like these.
 
user116848
Here LHS-> Left hand side? and vice versa?
 
F.E.
F.E.
1) "[What you were saying] was [that he was/is going to school]."
2) "[What you are saying] is [that he is going to school]."
 
user116848
5:58 AM
So here can we use '...was going to school' to mean present?
 
F.E.
F.E.
Look at #2 carefully.
 
user116848
yeah
 
F.E.
F.E.
You could actually say that to him as you are talking to him.
All present tense, right?
 
user116848
With 'was'?
 
F.E.
F.E.
#2 version -- with is.
 
user116848
5:59 AM
Yeah #2 is all present. Yes
 
F.E.
F.E.
The preterite can be used for 3 major uses: past time, modal remoteness, backshift.
 
user116848
yeah you told me that the other day. Yes.
 
F.E.
F.E.
Your first problem is to figure out whether the LHS and RHS deals with past time or not.
 
user116848
Mm
 
user116848
So in #1 what does 'was' say?
 
F.E.
F.E.
6:03 AM
For instance: 3) "[What you were saying yesterday] is [that he was going to school later that afternoon]."
Notice the two preterites being used for past time in the LHS and RHS.
Notice that the main verb "is" is present tense.
 
user116848
That's a good one! Yeah I notice 'is' and LHS, RHS 'past'
 
F.E.
F.E.
Right, for the "is" is like an equals sign: LHS == RHS.
That is one of the major uses of the present tense.
 
user116848
I see
 
F.E.
F.E.
So, we can have all three verbs be present tense -- version #2.
And we can have that mixed stuff in version #3.
Now let's look at a version where all three verbs are past tense -- which will be version #4.
4) "[What you were saying yesterday] was [that he was going to school later that afternoon]."
 
user116848
So (3 and (4 mean the same?
 
user116848
6:10 AM
Right? I think they are same with backshifting in (4
 
F.E.
F.E.
That main verb "was" in #4 (the middle verb) could probably be thought to have past time meaning (imo).
 
user116848
Oh, yeah that. I see
 
user116848
But you didn't explain #1? Were you coming to that?
 
F.E.
F.E.
By having that middle verb ("is") be a preterite, that will usually allow you to backshift the verbs in the LHS and RHS -- because the LHS and RHS are subordinate to it.
 
user116848
Nods
 
F.E.
F.E.
6:14 AM
Just on that last comment of mine, that basically tells you that you can usually use a preterite ("was") in your RHS -- because of the preterite "was" that's the main verb (the middle one). I'm talking about your original version (#1).
 
user116848
yes...
 
F.E.
F.E.
To use a present tense verb in the RHS for version #1, that might be harder to do. And it would probably be unacceptable more times than not.
There seems to be a mismatch for that version:
5) "[What you were saying yesterday] was [that he is (?) going to school later that afternoon]."
 
user116848
@F.E. But here is is only acceptable if afterrnoon hasn't arrived yet, right?
 
F.E.
F.E.
There's an extra constraint that must be fulfilled when the present tense (non-backshifted) verb is used in a subordinate clause like that in #5.
@Arrowfar That's the constraint I was thinking about. :)
 
user116848
:)
 
user116848
6:21 AM
I read it in CGEl (those 151-160 pages)
 
F.E.
F.E.
But for #5, that constraint might not apply in a certain context: a context where the RHS is emphasizing almost exactly what the other guy had said yesterday. (imo)
 
user116848
@F.E. So FE the only thing unlear to me now is that in 1) "[What you were saying] was [that he was/is going to school]" both was and is could mean the same thing?
 
F.E.
F.E.
You see, that sentence could be about whether or not the other person had actually mentioned about the other person ("he") going to school later that afternoon. That is why I'm thinking that that could be a context where that extra constraint doesn't apply to it.
@Arrowfar The version with "was" in the RHS is the default version, and would most likely be the expected version. So, that version would have 3 preterites in it.
The version where the first two verbs are preterites, but the 3rd verb (RHS) has a present tense verb would probably be unacceptable in most contexts.
Though, I think I had presented a context where it could work.
CAVEAT: This is late at night, and my head is worn-out, and so, my grammar could be a bit shaky at the moment. :)
 
user116848
@F.E. But why present here after was. Search (Ctrl+F) this line "what you were saying was that" here--->http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2013/s3775585.htm
 
user116848
 
user116848
6:34 AM
@F.E. Bye bye!. I had not read your whole comment about 'night' :D
 
F.E.
F.E.
> BILL SHORTEN: [Well, what you said (past)] is [that we need to - what you were saying was that you need to explain your story better and I was taking that up invitation to do it on this very popular show.
 
user116848
So it is very informal I guess...
 
F.E.
F.E.
Notice that the matrix verb is present tense ("is").
 
user116848
yeah
 
user116848
@F.E. Who's CAVEAT? :D
 
user116848
6:37 AM
Anyways.....I am listening.
 
F.E.
F.E.
Even if that matrix verb had been a preterite ("was"), the example basically is similar to what I was talking about earlier as the exception to that extra constraint.
Also, that's a transcript of actual dialogue. People speak "typos" all the time.
If you're looking for grammaticality, you should look at edited text: novels, books, etc.
Not word-for-word transcripts of real dialogue.
 
user116848
Yeah, I googled for my sentence and got that page. You are right though, it could be full of typos and informal language.
 
F.E.
F.E.
Notice the sentence in the 2nd half of his dialogue.
 
user116848
Yeah. Why not needed?
 
F.E.
F.E.
> [what you were saying] was [that you need to explain your story better]
@Arrowfar He could have. :)
 
user116848
6:42 AM
@F.E. okay. Which would have been better, right? I mean 'needed'
 
F.E.
F.E.
Perhaps the speaker intentionally chose the present tense (for the RHS) to emphasize that the "need" is still ongoing.
 
user116848
It could be. Yes.
 
F.E.
F.E.
@Arrowfar For the speaker's intent, the better choice is probably what he actually used--present tense in this case. (imo)
But as for a test, you might rather use a preterite for that RHS . . .
Usually, a backshift preterite is an option. Which means that the speaker/writer doesn't have to use it--the original present tense verb could be retained (often or usually).
 
user116848
Yeah it is all clear now. Thanks so much FE.
 
F.E.
F.E.
Though, most often, the backshift is probably the default version.
You're welcome :)
 
user116848
6:47 AM
@F.E. Thanks so much FE. (How did you know I was writing 'thanks'??)
 
user116848
:D
 
user116848
it's midday here. What time is it where you live?
 
F.E.
F.E.
Remember that the verb "need" is an unusual one, in that there is a modal and a lexical version of it. The modal "need" supposedly doesn't have a preterite form (if my memory is serving me right).
It is almost 2 AM for me.
 
user116848
:)
 
F.E.
F.E.
Maybe those previous examples with "need" in them should be looked at to see if they are using a modal "need" or not.
 
user116848
6:52 AM
So you think they are using modal verb?
 
F.E.
F.E.
I'll let you work on that one. The info is in CGEL, in Chapter 3 "the verb". As for me, I'm going to take a nap . . . Bye. :)
 
user116848
Bye:)
 
happenask
happenask
7:26 AM
i always wonder about why i get sleepy right after lunch
 
685-252
685-252
does it happen after supper also?
 
happenask
happenask
yes hehe
 
685-252
685-252
there is your answer, it is natural to feel sleepy after a meal :-)
 
happenask
happenask
taking a nap is best way to get over it .
but it is not easy to me
 
685-252
685-252
napping will ruin your sleep cycle at night
 
happenask
happenask
7:42 AM
napping for about 20 minute does not disturb sleep
 
685-252
685-252
ok
 
 
4 hours later…
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
11:25 AM
0
Q: noun clause & attributive clause

AprilCan “attributive clause” & “noun clause” be exchanged, excluding appositive clause? For example 1:Remind the clients what maintenance advice they should follow.(object clause) 2:Remind the clients the maintenance advice that they should follow. 3:I wonder where she comes from. (object clause) ...

grammar
They asked about attributive clause. This is not the first time.
1
Q: Is this an attributive clause?

Chuck This diagram illustrates these five transmission steps, which computer performs each, and which steps involve the messaging system. I am confused with the two "which clause"? Are they served as attributive clauses?

american-english
What's strange is that the accepted answer of the "Is this an attributive clause?" question didn't mention the term attributive clause. Not even once. :-)
I still have no clear idea about what an attributive clause is.
Though I'm not sure about the term "attributive clauses", I think the sentence is better to be rewritten as "This diagram illustrates these five transmission steps, which steps computer performs, and which steps involving the messaging system." That should be easy enough to understand which as a determiner that determines which steps in the two noun phrases. — Damkerng T. Jun 16 at 3:46
I wasn't sure. I'm still not.
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
11:38 AM
> It is easy to understand what some of the fears might be about having a girl on an all-male team, particularly one that places such an emphasis on direct physical contact.
Hmm... I think it's not a run-on either, but the use of what seems to be problematic to me. (I think using that would be better.)
(If only I had a clear rule that says that that what is incorrect ...)
 
Nico
Nico
> It is easy to understand what some of the fears might be about.
> Some of the fears are about having a girl on an all-male team, particularly one that places such an emphasis on direct physical contact.
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
In that case, I would combine them like this:
> It is easy to understand what some of the fears might be are about having a girl on an all-male team, particularly one that places such an emphasis on direct physical contact.
Or...
 
Nico
Nico
doesn't sound right to me
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
> It is easy to understand what some of the fears might be about are about having a girl on an all-male team, particularly one that places such an emphasis on direct physical contact.
 
Nico
Nico
11:53 AM
there is no hint as to what the subject of the second clause is
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Which clause did you refer to as the second clause?
 
Nico
Nico
what is the subject of are?
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
@DamkerngT. It is easy to understand (that) [ what some of the fears might be ] are about having a girl on an all-male team, particularly one that places such an emphasis on direct physical contact.
 
Nico
Nico
That's really a cool example of "that what" use. I think in this case that is not optional.
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
@DamkerngT. It is easy to understand (that) [ what some of the fears might be about ] are about having a girl on an all-male team, particularly one that places such an emphasis on direct physical contact.
 
Nico
Nico
11:57 AM
But the meaning of new sentence is different.
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Hmm... Dropping that (that) sounds quite alright to me.
@Nico Yes. I think the latter version is probably better with might be about might be about, instead of might be about are about.
@DamkerngT. It is easy to understand (that) [ what some of the fears might be about ] might be about having a girl on an all-male team, particularly one that places such an emphasis on direct physical contact.
 
Nico
Nico
... Nico is puzzled ...
... Nico's brain hurts ...
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
lol
Another possible version (that might convey the speaker's intention):
> It is easy to understand what some of the fears might be about having a girl on an all-male team is, particularly one that places such an emphasis on direct physical contact.
I still think it's not a good sentence.
 
Nico
Nico
They are two, actually.
It begs, at least, for a ; between about and having.
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
I couldn't parse it, with an a between about and having.
 
Nico
Nico
12:04 PM
I meant:
> It is easy to understand what some of the fears might be about; having a girl on an all-male team is, particularly one that places such an emphasis on direct physical contact.
or something more modern like a dash:
> It is easy to understand what some of the fears might be about -- having a girl on an all-male team is, particularly one that places such an emphasis on direct physical contact.
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
A-ha! That looks good too!
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
> I carry out the regeneration and production of machinery parts in the food sector.
Hmm... Can we regenerate machinery parts?
We probably can. I'm not familiar with it, though.
 
Anonymous
1:08 PM
@DamkerngT. Maybe in comic books we can :-)
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
It sounds about right in Transformers. :)
Hello!
 
Anonymous
@Nico Having a girl on an all-male team is… what, exactly? That sentence looks incomplete
 
Nico
Nico
... face palm... You are right!
@DamkerngT. @snailboat What do you make of the original sentence? Is it a run-on sentence?
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
I retract my "That looks good too!". :)
 
Anonymous
@Nico Can you quote it here?
 
Anonymous
1:13 PM
I'm not sure which version you mean
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
2 hours ago, by Damkerng T.
> It is easy to understand what some of the fears might be about having a girl on an all-male team, particularly one that places such an emphasis on direct physical contact.
It starts from there.
 
Nico
Nico
> It is easy to understand what some of the fears might be about having a girl on an all-male team, particularly one that places such an emphasis on direct physical contact.
2
Q: Determine and Understanding Run-On Sentence

Ben It is easy to understand what some of the fears might be about having a girl on an all-male team, particularly one that places such an emphasis on direct physical contact. How is the quote not a run-on? How is it a sentence?

grammar sentence-construction
 
Anonymous
"How is the quote not a run-on? How is it a sentence?" These are strange questions to ask
 
Anonymous
About is problematic because it encourages the wrong parse
 
Anonymous
You can fix that by adding in afterwards, since in can't be a complement of about
 
Nico
Nico
1:15 PM
I woudl split it as:
> It is easy to understand what some of the fears might be about.
> Some of the fears are about having a girl on an all-male team, particularly one that places such an emphasis on direct physical contact.
 
Anonymous
> It is easy to understand what some of the fears might be about in having a girl on an all-male team, particularly one that places such an emphasis on direct physical contact.
 
Anonymous
I'm not saying it's a great sentence that way, but it's easier to parse :-)
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
A-ha! That looks good too!
> "He dub her as "daughter-in-law" of Pakistan, pointing out that "she was married" to that country's cricketer."
my question is that why he has used past simple tense in this? Why didn't he used is instead of was?
http://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/29853/need-explanation-about-reporting-language
Probably, they're divorced. :D (And He dub is probably a typo. :-)
Nah, everything must be typo in there.
 
Nico
Nico
It reminds me of F.E. and arrowfar's latest chats.
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
By the way, I just got a Pundit badge! Hooray!
 
Anonymous
1:24 PM
The OP needs to improve the question.
 
Anonymous
Hooray!
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
I think "that country's cricketer" is a familiar mistake I made, too. :-)
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. Once again, it would be [that country]'s cricketer, which is grammatical
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
But I guess that he was talking about his own country.
 
Anonymous
that [country's cricketer] wouldn't be―is that really what you intended?
 
Anonymous
1:33 PM
Oh, you're saying you think they made that mistake
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
nods
 
Anonymous
Are you sure the OP is in Pakistan?
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
I'm not sure but I believe that that he is. (which makes my deduce that the OP is, too)
 
Anonymous
The sentence above really looks like it was written by the OP.
 
Anonymous
But in any case
 
Anonymous
1:34 PM
The OP said "cricketer of other country"
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Ahh... I missed that!
 
Anonymous
I'm not willing to answer that question as written since I'm skeptical the quote is accurate
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Me either. It also has no source. And I don't feel like I want to leave a comment this time.
 
Anonymous
It needs to be quoted properly and sourced
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Hmm... Probably I should do it. Someone needs to do something about the question.
 
Anonymous
1:37 PM
 
Anonymous
Sania was born in Maharashtra and settled in Hyderabad only later and, hence, is a "non-local", he told reporters here and sought to dub her as "daughter-in-law" of Pakistan, pointing out that she was married to that country's cricketer Shoaib Malik.
 
Anonymous
See, the OP edited the sentence and degraded it before posting
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
A-ha!
 
Anonymous
I left a comment.
 
Anonymous
Please quote the original sentence and provide a link or reference to the source. — snailplane 27 secs ago
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
1:40 PM
I'm going to dig in. :)
 
Anonymous
I decided not to do it for them
 
Anonymous
They should fix their own question
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Oh, okay. Then, I will leave it to the OP.
 
Anonymous
Just my opinion.
 
user8153
user8153
@snailboat
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
1:41 PM
Your comment should be enough for them.
 
user8153
user8153
The one that is in the wrong is she.
is this correct?
 
Anonymous
What do you think?
 
user8153
user8153
yes, according to traditional grammar.?
she...
 
Anonymous
She is a poor choice.
 
Anonymous
Her is clearly better.
 
user8153
user8153
1:42 PM
in conversational grammar, it would be "the one that is in the wrong is her?"
 
Anonymous
In all contexts.
 
user8153
user8153
but "this is she"
 
Anonymous
is inferior.
 
user8153
user8153
is more traditional
the book says
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
How about a Victorian context?
 
Anonymous
1:42 PM
Even back then, her was just fine.
 
user8153
user8153
 
Anonymous
But she was more acceptable hundreds of years ago.
 
Anonymous
It was also used.
 
user8153
user8153
what about this?
 
Anonymous
What about it?
 
user8153
user8153
1:44 PM
it says traditionalists insist that it be "she" when the meaning is subject.
 
Anonymous
It's true that if you want to sound very pretentious, you can say she instead of her
 
Anonymous
So if that's your goal, then it's fine.
 
user8153
user8153
I see.
thank you
 
Anonymous
Hundreds of years ago both usages coexisted.
 
Anonymous
Over time, accusative became more common than nominative
 
user8153
user8153
1:45 PM
i see.
 
Anonymous
And today, it is practically a hypercorrection
 
user8153
user8153
叢雲 here is my thank you gift.
 
Anonymous
People still use the nominative, but it is quite strange and should be discouraged
 
user8153
user8153
I learned this...
do you know it?
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
@user8153 What does it mean?
 
user8153
user8153
1:46 PM
it means "a thicket of clouds"
very poetical it says.
the dictionary
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Ahh... I see. It's not a common word, I guess.
 
user8153
user8153
you know Japanese?
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
I just started learning it. An absolute beginner. :)
 
user8153
user8153
I see.
good luck.
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Thanks. :D
 
user8153
user8153
1:48 PM
Mr. Polyglot!
I would learn ancient Greek, though.
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Aren't you a polyglot too? :-)
 
user8153
user8153
Yes...but you are more multilingual...
I only know my mother tongue and english and some Jap
I envy people who know Latin and Greek.
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
They could be very useful.
 
user8153
user8153
You know, Bacon translated his own works into Latin for their ever-lasting relevance.
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
I didn't! Thanks for the information!
 
Anonymous
1:51 PM
Wait, how does translating into Latin give your work ever-lasting relevance?
 
Anonymous
I mean, I like Latin and all.
 
user8153
user8153
Back then, Latin was an ecumenical language
 
Anonymous
But it seems like the wrong choice if you're going for ever-lasting relevance
 
Anonymous
叢雲 is rare
 
user8153
user8153
Yeah, but back then it was thought to be a must learn language and that future generations would keep the tradition,
 
Anonymous
1:52 PM
That is, the word itself is rare, referring to a gathering of clouds, but
 
Anonymous
It's significantly more common as a name
 
user8153
user8153
what about my translation? "a thicket of clouds?"
 
Anonymous
Umm, I guess it's fine? :-)
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
I guess that some other name such as yakumo has nothing to do with "cloud".
 
user8153
user8153
Oh, a silvery shaft pierces that thicket of clouds/all is quiet, all is gone that is loud.
A heroic couplet!
 
Anonymous
1:55 PM
What makes you guess that, Damkerng?
 
user8153
user8153
@snailboat how woudl you translate it into Jap using 叢雲
?
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
I don't know. I also can remember yakumo only vaguely.
Ahh... It looks like what I heard of yakumo is actually a battleship.
 
Anonymous
In my country, we don't say Jap as an abbreviation for Japanese because it's still felt to be a racial slur. We used it back in World War 2 and we put Japanese-Americans into concentration camps, and the shame of that is still with us to this day
 
Anonymous
Internment of Japanese Americans
The internment of Japanese Americans was the World War II internment in "War Relocation Camps" of over 110,000 people of Japanese heritage who lived on the Pacific coast of the United States. The U.S. government ordered the internment in 1942, shortly after Imperial Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor. The internment of Japanese Americans was applied unequally as a geographic matter: all who lived on the West Coast were interned, while in Hawaii, where 150,000-plus Japanese Americans comprised over one-third of the population, only 1,200 to 1,800 were interned. Sixty-two percent of the internees were...
 
user8153
user8153
Oh sorry...
but how would you translate it?
 
Ice Girl
Ice Girl
1:57 PM
16
Q: What is the difference between "do you like" and "would you like"?

Ice GirlDo you like candy? Would you like some candy? Do you like walking? Would you like to go for a walk? What is the difference? and are they the same or not? Do they use in different situations?

meaning usage modal-verbs word-difference
I'm happy
Did you see it?
 
Anonymous
I don't really do translations of poetry into Japanese, or at all
 
Anonymous
0
Q: Why will my account be blocked?

user2444I was trying asking a question , it says : Wait! Some of your past questions have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from asking any more. For help formulating a clear, useful question, see: How do I ask a good question? Also, edit your previous questions...

support bug
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
@IceGirl You should thank me. I'm the first one who upvote it. :)
 
user8153
user8153
Oh i see.
 
Ice Girl
Ice Girl
Did you see it?
@DamkerngT. REALLY THANKS
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
1:59 PM
You're welcome. And congrats. :)
 
Ice Girl
Ice Girl
:)
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
@snailboat I haven't seen something like that before!
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. It's new
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Hmm... How well-receieved is well-receieved enough?
 
Anonymous
Preeeetty poorly.
 
Anonymous
2:03 PM
1
Q: Can “if-clause” be used in a sentence as the real subject?

AprilCan an “if-clause” be used in a sentence as the real subject? For example It makes no difference if he comes. Am I right?

subject if-clause
 
Cerberus
Cerberus
Interesting.
@snailboat Hmm do duplicates affect someone's "quality"?
 
user8153
user8153
@snailboat I can't understand this...I’ll set a bourn how far to be beloved.
what is this grammar?
it says.."I want to know how far your love extends."
 
Anonymous
It's Early Modern English grammar.
 
user8153
user8153
but how can it mean that?
literally, I want to set a limit of how far I can be loved?
 
Anonymous
2:18 PM
@user8153 I don't think it does
 
user8153
user8153
then how would you explain this
 
Kabir
Kabir
3:06 PM
Hello everyone
 
CopperKettle
CopperKettle
3:19 PM
Hi Kabir, hi peeps
I have a feeling that meatie is an AI entity, judging from their questions, no offense meant of course.
Or a carrier of some language very unlike English.
 
Anonymous
4:24 PM
1
Q: Can an “if-clause” be used as an extraposed subject?

AprilWhen a subject is a whether-clause, it can be extraposed: [Whether (or not) he comes] makes no difference.　　(basic version) It makes no difference [whether (or not) he comes].　　(extraposed) The logical subject is "extraposed", pulled out of its basic position and moved to the end of the s...

subject if-clause extraposition
 
Anonymous
Since this question asked about a "real subject", it was clear to me that it was about extraposition. With that in mind, I elaborated on the question a little. It should be clear now that this isn't a duplicate―the other question is not about extraposition. — snailplane 1 min ago
 
Anonymous
0
Q: "As...." Structure

meatieMore confusion about the "as..." structure: 1 People affect laws as laws affect people. 2 People view laws as laws affect people. I have a feeling that they mean, respectively: 3 People affect laws in the same way that laws affect people. 4 People view laws with respect to the w...

grammar meaning usage
 
Anonymous
Are these made-up sentences? Specially 3 and 4 don't sound good to me. — Nico 11 mins ago
 
Anonymous
Sentence two seems strange to me, too
 
Anonymous
Sentence one seems okay.
 
Anonymous
4:28 PM
I guess sentence three is okay.
 
Anonymous
Ahh, reading this question hurt my brain a little. :-)
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
@snailboat I still wonder what made the OP think the if-clause is the subject.
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. They wrote "real subject"
 
Anonymous
The only reason you'd call it a "real subject" is to distinguish it from some sort of "dummy subject" or "expletive subject" like it, as in extraposition
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Trying to make the if-clause as the subject hurts my little brain. :)
 
Anonymous
4:36 PM
It's the logical subject. Or displaced subject. Or extraposed subject.
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
I should upgrade my CPU.
 
Anonymous
Whatever you want to call it.
 
Anonymous
Some folks, to F.E's eternal chagrin, would call it a postposed subject or a real subject
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. Informally, some English speakers use "CPU" to refer to an entire computer case and all of its contents, what I would call a "box"
 
Anonymous
Although tech literate folks tend to look down on this usage
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
4:39 PM
nods -- I think calling CPU a box, or using it so, is not correct.
 
Nico
Nico
@snailboat I meant 2 and 4
 
Anonymous
@Nico That makes more sense
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. Did you say that backwards?
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Umm... I think it's incorrect in both directions. :)
 
Anonymous
Well, no one refers to a CPU as a box
 
Anonymous
4:40 PM
But people refer to boxen as CPUs.
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Hmm... I usually think of CPUs as chips, and boxes as cases.
 
Anonymous
Right
 
Anonymous
Yeah, the box is the case and everything in it
 
Anonymous
Often referred to as just a "machine"
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
I think words such as black-box make the line blur.
 
Anonymous
4:42 PM
That's an unrelated use of box
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Hmm... I guess it's related.
 
Anonymous
Synchronically unrelated at a minimum.
 
Anonymous
I don't think the usages are historically related, apart from both being derived from the basic term box
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Hmm... I thought the terms black-box and white-box inspired people to start calling their machines boxes. I'm not really sure how we end-up with boxen, though.
But its sound is quite nice.
 
Anonymous
Cf. VAXen
 
Nico
Nico
4:47 PM
@snailboat Reopened! Hooray!
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
A-ha! I've never thought of VAX as the origin!
Actually, VAX was the first mini-computer I used.
I forgot its model, but I think it was VAX-11 something.
We usually used it to play rogue. A very good way to use an expensive machine :)
Oh, I miss those dungeons!
From what I gathered, April (the OP in that if-clause the extraposed subject question) is probably a ling student.
 
Anonymous
Oh, I haven't read enough of her questions to notice
 
Anonymous
(This is probably the first for me!)
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
April usually uses uncommon terminologies other learners don't use.
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. I was looking into a book called Japanese by Shoichi Iwasaki
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
4:54 PM
Yay! -- Umm... What is it about? Japanese, right? :)
 
Anonymous
It turns out the author is a professor of linguistics who also specializes in Thai and co-wrote A reference grammar of Thai
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Hah!
 
Anonymous
@DamkerngT. It seems to be a 400-page book describing various aspects of the language from a linguistics perspective
 
Anonymous
I was reading through parts of it on Google Books
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
> A reference grammar of Thai (co-authored with Preeya Ingkaphirom), Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Hmm... This gives me an itch. :)
 
Anonymous
4:56 PM
 
Anonymous
Here's A reference grammar of Thai: books.google.com/…
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Ah! Thanks for the link!
 
Nico
Nico
@StoneyB I have another question as an aside. Would it be acceptable to avoid the use of subjunctive and write "My idea is that the child is sent to school"? — Nico 2 mins ago
 
Anonymous
Is seems a little strange there
 
Nico
Nico
Whenever I use the subjunctive I have the impression that makes the sentece very formal.
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
5:01 PM
I'm browsing through example Thai sentences in that grammar book, and they give me a strange feeling!
 
Nico
Nico
> My idea is that the child is sent to school
> My idea is that the child be sent to school
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
I guess subjunctive is possible.
 
Nico
Nico
Does it sound formal?
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Subjunctive usually gives me a feeling of uncommon, and also more often than not formal.
 
Nico
Nico
The least formal version I can think of, without changing the main structure, is: "My idea is to send the child to school".
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
5:10 PM
I'd say that each of them all has a different shade in meaning. -- Though they're really, really close to others.
Like, to some people, green and blue look quite the same, but other people would say that turquoise and green aren't the same. Yet there might be some other people who could even tell the difference between #0000ff and #0000fe.
 
Nico
Nico
:)
Gotta go! Have a nice day!
 
Damkerng T.
Damkerng T.
Have a nice day! See you soon!
Oh, they rerun Predator! Nice. Off to watch it. :)
 
00:00 - 18:0018:00 - 00:00

« first day (546 days earlier)      last day (353 days later) »