Language Overflow

userr2684291

00:36

"He says it's X, which I'm not sure what it means in this context." Is this sentence grammatical? I know I shouldn't get married to the beginning of a sentence if it dooms the rest of it, but I really want to keep the part until, and including "sure" (it might as well read "which I don't know"). Is there a way to rephrase the rest, or do I have your permission to give it up as a bad job?

Damkerng T.

01:29

@userr2684291 I think whose meaning I'm not sure about would flow better (if you want to keep sure).

user178049

08:49

Hi

V.V.

10:21

Hi all. Is the sentence correct? "The mother was so absorbed in her mobile phone that even if somebody had come and had stolen her bored daughter she wouldn't have noticed it."

userr2684291

@user178049 Hey.

@DamkerngT. I meant that "He says it's X, which I'm not sure" should remain unchanged, but OK, I guess it's entirely incorrect.

@V.V. Looks good, apart from the missing comma after "daughter". Also, people usually don't get "stolen", they get kidnapped/abducted/snatched (apart when you "steal someone's girlfriend/boyfriend", but that has a different meaning). Also, I wouldn't've repeated the "had" before "stolen".

CowperKettle

10:36

Good day!

Is there a strict rule in English to start each word in a headline with a capital letter?

I hate doing this.

A fellow translator advises that I change my translation by capitalizing each word

user178049

@userr2684291 :-D

M.A.R.

@CowperKettle Title case. Not a rule, just a convention, and a shaky one at that

CowperKettle

@M.A.R. Thank you, Mamad!

M.A.R.

@CowperKettle It would look fancier, and you'll get used to it fast

CowperKettle

I hope I recalled the name correctly

@M.A.R. I will try to do that starting from the next translation, but with this one I'm lazy

user178049

10:40

Actually, I have a question. Pullum says in a video that passives do not always have be, because we also have Get-passive. But I'm wondering, isn't Get also a BE

Because I can replace it with another copular "He gets weird"→"He is weird"

V.V.

@userr2684291, thanks, I doubted the perfect infinitive, so it's. OK

M.A.R.

@CowperKettle There's a site that automagically adds title case to headlines. titlecase.com or somesuch

Anonymous

Get and be can both take predicative complements, but that doesn't mean get is be.

user178049

@snailplane Hmm.. how can I test that

Anonymous

They have overlapping patterns of complementation, but they aren't the same word.

Anonymous

10:49

@user178049 Get is simply not a form of be. Try a progressive construction: I am washing the windows. ⇔ *I get washing the windows. You can't form it with get.

Anonymous

It's a different verb with different grammar.

user178049

Ohh..that way, thanks @snailplane :-D

M.A.R.

I get washing the windows all the time

Anonymous

In fact, be is a unique verb. No other verb has the same grammar, although there are individual constructions where other verbs work.

Damkerng T.

@userr2684291 I think you're right. He says it's X, but I'm not sure would be a better choice, I suppose.

Anonymous

10:52

In your example, be is taking a predicative complement (PC). In this case, the PC would be called a subject complement in traditional grammar. Many verbs can take PCs, and these are the verbs you're referring to as "copulars".

Damkerng T.

About get and be, try to replace get with be in I'll go get some cookies. :P

Good evening/morning, everyone!

M.A.R.

\o

Anonymous

Good morning! :-)

M.A.R.

o/

Anonymous

I will probably be largely absent for the next week.

Anonymous

10:54

I'll try to be around when I can, though :-)

Damkerng T.

@snailplane Understood!

I don't know if gambattene sounds appropriate, but I hope it does.

Anonymous

:-)

Anonymous

If we want to consider two forms to be forms of the same word, we need to find a systematic alternation between them.

Anonymous

For example, in English we have an alternation between present and past tense.

Anonymous

I walk, I walked.

Anonymous

11:00

This sort of alternation is systematic. Every non-defective verb seems to have a pair of forms, and in most cases they're regular (formed with the -ed suffix).

Anonymous

In a few cases they're irregular: I throw a ball, I threw a ball.

Anonymous

In some really exceptional cases, we find forms that don't appear to be related:

Anonymous

I go, I went.

Anonymous

These come from two different verbs originally, go and wend.

Anonymous

And yet, we claim that went is a form of go. Why? Because we systematically choose one form or the other depending on tense, treating them as forms of one word.

Anonymous

11:04

Tomorrow I fly to Taiwan. Yesterday I flew to Taiwan.

Anonymous

Tomorrow I go to Taiwan. Yesterday I went to Taiwan.

Anonymous

We find that went corresponds to go in the same sorts of situations that flew corresponds to fly. This is what I mean by "systematic".

Anonymous

Now, this sort of correspondence is very rare when two forms are not etymologically related. It's called suppletion, and it usually only occurs with the most common, most irregular verbs in the language, verbs like go and be.

3

Anonymous

But we can't find any such correspondence between be and get, so there are no grounds to say that get is a form of be, even though in some cases both verbs work the same way grammatically.

Anonymous

And in fact, in most cases they do not work the same way grammatically.

Anonymous

11:07

For example, be is usually an auxiliary verb, so it inverts with subjects in questions: I am confused. ⇔ Am I confused?

Anonymous

But get is never an auxiliary: I get what you're saying. ⇔ Do you get what I'm saying? We need do-support here to form a question because get is not an auxiliary, so it can't invert with the subject by itself.

M.A.R.

Get you what I'm saying?

Anonymous

@M.A.R. Hundreds of years ago, in older forms of English, we had something called subject–verb inversion, and it was something just about any ol' verb could do.

Anonymous

And so the sort of word order you just used, "Get you what I'm saying?", was a normal part of the language.

Anonymous

Over time it changed so that only special verbs, called auxiliaries, could invert with the subject under most circumstances.

M.A.R.

11:11

English was weird back then. So Star Warsy

Anonymous

And so we usually refer to the modern version as subject–auxiliary inversion instead, although of course auxiliaries are a kind of verb.

Anonymous

But because it was once a standard feature of the language, if you invert a lexical verb (here "lexical verb" means "non-auxiliary verb") with a subject, it sounds old-fashioned. Archaic.

Anonymous

And no, Yoda doesn't speak that way. Yoda typically fronts verbal complements past the subject: What I'm saying, you get?

M.A.R.

I wasn't thinking Yoda. Just the early Star Wars

Anonymous

Can you give an example of subject–verb inversion from Star Wars?

M.A.R.

11:15

Dunno where to look

The latter Star Wars movies transcripts are a bit cheesier, but earn more

That old Darth guy used it once, I think

The examples in the animated versions are probably more often

user178049

Good evening @DamkerngT. !

Damkerng T.

Evening!

M.A.R.

Good evening @DamkerngT.! O.O

Damkerng T.

@M.A.R. \o

user178049

Do have Asians here.. wondering

Damkerng T.

11:19

I think What say you? can be considered an example of subject-verb inversion.

@user178049 I'm Asian. :)

user178049

@DamkerngT. Nice to know :) Wait..can "say" be auxiliary

M.A.R.

@user178049 I'm Asian too

@user178049 No

Damkerng T.

I don't think it's an auxiliary verb. It's a remnant from the old days, I think.

M.A.R.

Everything is a remnant from the old days, except Twitter and Facebook

user178049

I think itd be safe if we say "subject-operator inversion".. but I dont like it..it doesn roll off my tongue.

M.A.R.

11:22

@user178049 What's wrong with subject–auxiliary inversion?

!!wiki/subject-auxiliary inversion

Ellbot

Subject–auxiliary inversion

Subject–auxiliary inversion (also called subject–operator inversion) is a frequently occurring type of inversion in English, whereby a finite auxiliary verb – taken here to include finite forms of the copula be – appears to "invert" (change places) with the subject. The word order is therefore Aux-S (auxiliary–subject), which is the opposite of the canonical SV (subject–verb) order of declarative clauses in English. The most frequent use of subject–auxiliary inversion in English is in the formation of questions, although it also has other uses, including the formation of condition clauses, and...

user178049

@M.A.R. I thought auxiliaries and operators are different.

M.A.R.

Yeah

But I tend to go with the more common name

user178049

Because I think we can move lexical verb.. like "have"

M.A.R.

And modals like ''must''

user178049

11:26

@M.A.R. Haha..Okay..I do so

M.A.R.

Do what?

user178049

I tend to go with the more common name..sorry for my slow response..I'm using my phone now

M.A.R.

Ahh

@user178049 'I do too' is more correct, or 'so do I'.

user178049

@M.A.R. Ohh..Thanks :-D

Damkerng T.

12:16

Word of the Day: raison d'être

Araucaria

13:27

0

A: Are English consonant sounds [p], [t], [k] aspirated before another consonant?

When we make a voiced sound, for example a vowel sound, our vocal cords vibrate. This gives the sound pitch. We can make voiced sounds with a high pitch or a low pitch. For this reason, you can sing a tune using a [z] sound. You cannot do this, for example, with an unvoiced sound like [s]. We don...

Damkerng T.

13:56

> For this reason, you can sing a tune using a [z] sound. You cannot do this, for example, with an unvoiced sound like [s].

Love!

Argh! A typo!

> When the voiceless posives [p, t] or [k]

Araucaria

@DamkerngT. Aaaargh. Thanks!

Damkerng T.

No problem! :D

M.A.R.

14:36

0

Q: An inversion ???

I don't get this quote below in grammar. Could you analysis this sentence for me？ "Waive" is a verb, so it can't be the subject. This quote seems in inverted order. Is it an inversion? But just "MFAT should waive immunity if there are allegations of serious crimes" is enough to elucidate the ...

That weird question mark again.

？

Damkerng T.

15:10

Maybe it's a CJK character?

yubraj

15:32

Hi...everyone!

How are yo all?

Good evening!

M.A.R.

Evening

Man_From_India

16:06

because is a preposition, and the preposition phrase headed by the head preposition - because - can function as the subject of a sentence, but in that case the preposition must needs a modifier - just. I don't think we ever use because without just in such cases.

M.A.R.

o.O

Man_From_India

for example we say just because we do it doesn't mean we can;t do otherwise. I think we never drop just in similar sentences.

M.A.R.

16:30

Yeah, sounds like a fixed thing

userr2684291

16:55

> Our whole country is going to hell!
It's going to be a fantastic farewell.
So what else is new?
They don't have a clue!
Big new ABC poll coming out I hope I do well!

I can't believe how accurate that is, given that it was machine-generated.

CowperKettle

17:51

> Thus, the range of the method is from 0.3 to 0.9 mg/ml, which corresponds to the range from 80 to 120 % of the nominal concentration of DRUG in the sample solution.

I wonder if this shouldn't be a instead

user62015

18:45

@M.A.R.

M.A.R.

Yes?

@CowperKettle I just don't generally like the sentence

And prolly missing context too, but it seems it should be ''ranging from 80 to 120 percent of the nominal concentration . . . ''

user62015

I need your help

Do you think question 2 is right on this website

englishaliens.com/ssc/topic/ssc-chsl-10-2/synonyms-same-words/2

pawn

M.A.R.

@user62015 If you ask me, none of the exam questions are a fit for ELL in the form they're asked.

user62015

It is for ssc

M.A.R.

Most users, and some mods, seem to disagree with me on that though.

user62015

18:53

Indian government job

M.A.R.

That's irrelevant.

user62015

Do you think A is the right choice?

M.A.R.

Of course, you can always ask stuff in chat, as you usually do.

user62015

Pledge

M.A.R.

@user62015 Well, it is the closest option

user62015

18:54

Thanks.

I just wanted to know that.

Thank you so much

M.A.R.

Don't mention it

Damkerng T.

22:19

theverge.com/2017/3/17/14951020/…

I love the name Boaty McBoatface. (^_^)

Anonymous

Me too. :-)

user178049

23:14

@DamkerngT. Hard to pronounce, I even had to practice it..lol

Damkerng T.

(^_^)

Transcript for