Conversation started Aug 15, 2016 at 15:00.
Aug 15, 2016 15:00
OK about whether, do you say 'Whether x is the case' or do you say 'whether or not x is the case'?
@Randal'Thor Heh, nice one.
or 'whether x is the case or not'
Depends on context, doesn't it? [that will depend on] whether X is the case But, whether X is the case or not [, I'm still going]
Is this correct as a title of a banner? "Shavadoon printing and advertising"
@MartinAJ Maybe capitalize? "Shavadoon Printing and Advertising"
Aug 15, 2016 15:02
@MartinAJ Could be, yes. If Shavadoon is the name of the business, I'd set it apart with a colon though. Like this: "Shavadoon: Printing and Advertising"
Hmm. Now that I look at it again, I'm not sure.
Nah, no colon.
@terdon That's it, I just don't know. I remember someone saying years ago to remove the 'or not'. and they didn't explain why.
@Mitch If you had "regardless of whether ...", then "or not" is redundant. Likewise with @terdon's "depends on whether ...". Otherwise, "whether" just gives you the positive case, and "or not" is required for the negative.
@terdon :no colon:
Ah ok ... thank you guys
@Lawrence ok. that makes sense.
Aug 15, 2016 15:06
> Regardless of whether it will be raining, I'm going to church on Sunday.
Whether it will be raining or not, I'm not going to church.
@Cerberus Yes, the "or not" is latent in "regardless".
@Cerberus I think you meant irregardless. Tsk.
so both cerb's and my statements are OK?
@terdon literally
I think or not is still possible in that example.
@terdon Silence!
Aug 15, 2016 15:08
@Cerberus But maybe "regardless of whether it rains ..."
I do find Cerb's example a bit odd. I would probably have said something like regardless of the rain, I'll be going
argh! so complex!
> I'm going to church on Sunday whether it rains or not.
Regardless of the weather, I'm not going to church.
@Cerberus Possible, but redundant. :)
Aug 15, 2016 15:08
@Lawrence Agreed.
Yeah, I think the regardless . . . verbING is what makes it strange.
@Lawrence Yes, I changed my tenses so many times...
I think redundancy is the context problem altogether
@terdon I agree: the whole whether thing is redundant there.
@terdon I think verbing weirds language
@Cerberus 'whether' is redundant?
Aug 15, 2016 15:09
I should have constructed a better example...
@Mitch When it can be replaced with a simpler construction.
Preposition + whether + clause is more complex than preposition + noun.
@Mitch meh.
And thanks.
Regardless of whether it rains → regardless of the rain.
regardless of rain.
Although the latter may suggest that it will be raining for sure?
yeah, that.
Aug 15, 2016 15:12
Regardless of potential rain?
I think a normal human would say "Whether it's raining or not"
Or, if they're being funny, "Weather it's raining or not..."
@Lawrence I would say you need or not when the whether clause is elliptical, i.e. when the clause that it depends on is omitted.
"Whether the weather allows it or not. ;)
regardless of the weather.
@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Is anyone in here a normal human?
Aug 15, 2016 15:13
@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 In which sentence?
or regardless of weather...hmm.
@Cerberus Example, please?
What's a normal human?
I would say weather permitting...
@Cerberus Instead of "Regardless of rain" or whatever.
Aug 15, 2016 15:14
@Lawrence Whether it's raining or not, she's still going.
@Cerberus That doesn't meant the same thing though
@Cerberus But if the weather literally doesn't permit it, you aren't going. It's only if the weather hampers you that you can still go anyway.
@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 OK it works in that construction, when you have regardless, but not in all other situations.
Whether it's raining or not, I'm going shopping != Weather permitting, I'm going shopping
@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 No.
Aug 15, 2016 15:15
Whether my weather gear allows me to weather the weather?
"Weather permitting, I'm going to church" means you're only going if it doesn't rain.
It all depends on the strength of the rain
@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Rain or shine.
@Cerberus That doesn't have "regardless". The "or not" is needed if there's no regardless or similar.
@Randal'Thor I'm not one to out when it's raining. I'm made of sugar.
Aug 15, 2016 15:15
@Cerberus Yes.
:-)
@Randal'Thor The dots were meant to indicate a twist!
@Lawrence Yes, and I was trying to generalise that by calling it elliptical.
It works just like whatever.
Religious wars were started over less.
> Whether weather permits or not, I'll go. I'll not let rain reign over me nor wind wind me up.
Whether permitting
@Randal'Thor Maybe.
@Randal'Thor Ha!
Aug 15, 2016 15:18
@Randal'Thor of if it be bees
OK, now that that has been totally muddied...
'lightening' is not and has not ever been a word, right?
unless you're trying to lighten the load
and that act is called 'lightening the load'
right?
Actually odo lists it
A drop in the level of the womb during the last weeks of pregnancy as the head of the fetus engages in the pelvis.
I'm doing my part to keep things on topic.
You can't say now that I'm always off topic.
@Cerberus But I don't think "whether it rains or not, I'm going to church" has any ellipsis, other than with "or (does) not (rain)". I don't think it's fair to say that "whether it rains, I'm going to church" is ungrammatical because of ellipsis when the ellipsis comes into play only when you add "or not". :)
Hehe.
@Helmar Oh...that's perfectly fine, as an extension of lighten meaning to lessen the weight of
Aug 15, 2016 15:21
@Lawrence Oh, no, those are two different instances of ellipsis.
The or not is or may be elliptical.
But the ellipsis I was talking about is [regardless of] whether...
> [Regardless of] whether it rains or not, I'm going to church.
@Mitch Well, the baby is still getting heavier until it's out
lightening as a variant spelling of false/flok etymology of 'lightning' that bright flashy stuff in the sky during thunderstorms.
This seems elliptical to me ^.
@Helmar OMG and they keep getting heavier
@Mitch Very true :D
Aug 15, 2016 15:22
@Mitch Or the mood.
@Cerberus But is it valid to say that "regardless of" was ellipsed in that case?
Or the sky?
@Randal'Thor ye, metaphorically.
@Lawrence I'm wondering whether it is valid, and I'm tending towards "yes" at the moment!
Aug 15, 2016 15:23
I feel like some people have made a case for 'lightening bug'.
I have negative tendentious words for those people.
MW actually lists lightening with lightning
to give out flashes of lightning
I'm still folowwing the 'whether' discussion. Just... I have no comment yet. when the decision is made to push the button to release the warheads, then I'll show up.
@Helmar God damn them
@Lawrence What is it called when a subordinating word can be attached to any kind of main clause, like if or because, as opposed to e.g. relative and interrogative pronouns, which can only be used when the main clause meets certain conditions?
Aug 15, 2016 15:25
@Mitch Indeed xD
@Cerberus The fact that the words aren't needed doesn't mean that the words are missing, right?
@Lawrence Indeed not. But I think they may be missing here.
I'm arguing that whether is of the latter category, like relative and interrogative pronouns.
@Helmar They all seem to be right all up until this one: "2: to give out flashes of lightning"
@Cerberus Aye, there's the rub.
Perhaps whether is best considered an interrogative pronoun, according to my theory?
Aug 15, 2016 15:26
@Mitch Yeah, that totally steps out of line
that is the kind of devolution into swamp creatures we should all endeavor stamp out.
along with consistent metaphors.
@Cerberus @Mitch here come the warheads. :)
sticking with one metaphor as bridge we won't count
@Lawrence I don't know that they are warheads.
Tchrist often uses the that construction.
coordinate clause?
Aug 15, 2016 15:28
@Cerberus Sorry, noob here as far as Linguistics is concerned.
adverbial clause?
Which to me sounds pleasantly old fashioned.
@Lawrence Oh OK.
Where is schoolhouse rock to tell us the answer?
Oh. Youtube.
@Cerberus Still trying to parse this. What's the latter category - "missing", or "interrogative pronouns"?
@Mitch You forgot the diaeresis.
Aug 15, 2016 15:29
@Cerberus This ain't the New YOrker
Or maybe it needs to be...
here's a pet peeve of mine...
The Dorgi.
a pet peeve pet.
@Lawrence The category of subordinating words that only work with certain kinds of main clauses. Unlike if and because, which work with any kind of main clause.
wait..here's ther real peeve.
> *John lived in the forest, why the witch desired him.
> *The forest was thick, who liked to eat children.
People who pronounce the abbreviation for a commonly held store (where the owners are also the primary customers in bulk) as though it were housing for poultry.
@Cerberus Can't whether be used everywhere if or because is used?
Aug 15, 2016 15:31
Why and who don't work in those sentences. ^
@Lawrence I would argue that it cannot. Except with ellipsis.
The abbreviation for cooperative pronounced 'coop' rather than 'co op'
this is the only confusion in english orthography that would be helped by the diaeresis.
@Mitch We use diaeresis in the English room!
@Mitch Ow, that's silly.
I wouldn't.
but anybody who knows anything should pronounce 'coop', as short for cooperative, in two syllables.
People might think noone were an old spelling variant of noon.
@Cerberus that's why you spell that 'no one'
Aug 15, 2016 15:34
Or noöne.
cut out the middle man by introducing a middle space
@Cerberus There may be instances that whether can be used when if can't - e.g. "Whether it rains depends on several things" - but for the reverse, nothing comes to mind immediately.
People don't like no one because it's everyone, someone.
@Cerberus then we're reduced to communicating on macs.
@Cerberus Anyone?
... Oops, scrap that.
Aug 15, 2016 15:35
Bueller?
@Lawrence No. "If X is true, Y is also true" =/= "Whether X is true, Y is also true".
Nobody.
Nothing
@Lawrence I would say it's also elliptical in that example.
Never
@Mitch Whaaat?!
@Mitch Exactly.
Aug 15, 2016 15:37
@Cerberus Hmm, things that aren't there are really hard to spot. :)
@Lawrence Sometimes "whether" should be used because "if" would be ambiguous. "They'll ask me if I eat" could mean either "they'll ask me whether I eat" or "if I eat, they'll ask me".
@Randal'Thor Yup, I got that. Brain's in a slow gear at the moment.
@Lawrence Quite!
@Cerberus I'd go along with an ellipsed "Regardless of ..." in that example. Ok, I can see where you're coming from now.
 
Conversation ended Aug 15, 2016 at 15:41.