English Language Learners

Damkerng T.

03:59

I'm glad that someone finally dares say that it's ungrammatical.

1

A: ...so is applicable to all environments - Where did the subject of the verb go?

I'll first reiterate what the other answers said before I go into a bit more detail. The sentence is correctly read as: Although there is one chapter dedicated to the web browser environment, the rest of the book is about JavaScript in general, so it is applicable to all environments. This ...

F.E.

05:16

. . . scratch . . .

Maleficent: "I must say, I really felt quite distressed at not receiving an invitation." :D

Damkerng T.

Everyone be ready for Maleficent's wrath! :)

F.E.

@DamkerngT. I thought the OP's version to be a bit awkward sounding to my AmE ear. But I was interested in other perspectives. Interestingly, there seems to be a few grammatical thingies that might be involved here. :)

One version that seems interesting is: "[T]he rest of the book is about JavaScript in general, and so is applicable to all environments."

Damkerng T.

Hmm... This so sounds like a such.

F.E.

But when "it" is introduced, then the question of what is the antecedent seems to become more explicitly pronounced. That is, is the antecedent a NP or the previous clause? "[T]he rest of the book is about JavaScript in general, and so it is applicable to all environments."

Damkerng T.

I think that is the author's intention.

F.E.

05:29

@DamkerngT. "[T]he rest of the book is about JavaScript in general, and [so / therefore / thus / as such] is applicable to all environments."

Damkerng T.

Ahh... you meant that that so functions as an adverb. <-- cough

F.E.

Perhaps one of the big questions that I was interested in was in whether or not the "and" can be omitted as the OP did in his example. I probably should check the "Adjunct" chapter in CGEL . . . :)

@DamkerngT. At least you didn't say adverb-y. :D

Damkerng T.

:)

F.E.

You do know that NPs that function as subject of a clause are PP-y, right? :D

Damkerng T.

Eh? I think It's rather PPs that function as subject of a clause are NP-y. :D

In any case, it's interesting that the OP had only 693 rep points when they offered the 500-point bounty. (Now they have only 193 points!)

I hope that it wasn't because the OP was clicking the wrong button. :)

F.E.

05:38

@DamkerngT. But if you do that, then you'll be making the category of NP become like the general catch-all basket that adverbs/adverbials has become for traditional grammar.

Damkerng T.

O-oh! I just ran into a wrong vs the wrong again. (I think a wrong is good this time.)

F.E.

@DamkerngT. Merely "clicked" would usually be used there. :)

Damkerng T.

Hmm... Weird. I read that sentence again, and think... the wrong sounds better.

@F.E. Hee. :D

F.E.

@DamkerngT. "I hope that it wasn't because the OP clicked a/the wrong button." -- though, "the" would probably be more usual, I didn't find "a" to be, er, "wrong" here.

Damkerng T.

The thing is I think I have a tendency to say a wrong when native speakers usually say the wrong. I couldn't figure out my own patterns. I also couldn't figure out the usage patterns of native speakers. :D

F.E.

05:45

But in this case, the OP probably had plenty of buttons available to click, and he might have clicked on one of them: a wrong button. :)

Instead of clicking on the correct button: the right button. :D

Damkerng T.

But obviously, when I said that sentence the first time, I thought of a lot of buttons the OP could click on, and the OP might've clicked on a wrong one.

Then, when I read what I wrote again, I think it should be the wrong button because it is the button that the OP clicked on.

F.E.

Also, then, any of the wrong buttons would also be the wrong button. . . . "Who's on First? What's on Second?" . . . You're familiar with that comedy routine?

Damkerng T.

I'm sorry. I think I'm not. :D

F.E.

Abbott and Costello (spelling?) . . . A very funny routine, where the baseball players' names are pronouns: Who, What, etc.

Damkerng T.

Hah! lol :)

F.E.

05:48

I should search the web for a video. . . .

Damkerng T.

I think Rush Hour 2 might borrow the routine. (They had one about Mi and Yu. Who're you? I'm Yu. And who's he? I'm Mi. :)

F.E.

►

Here it is! :D

Who's on First?

"Who's on First?" is a comedy routine made famous by Abbott and Costello. The premise of the sketch is that Abbott is identifying the players on a baseball team for Costello, but their names and nicknames can be interpreted as non-responsive answers to Costello's questions. For example, the first baseman is named "Who"; thus, the utterance "Who's on first" is ambiguous between the question ("Which person is the first baseman?") and the answer ("The name of the first baseman is 'Who'"). History "Who's on First?" is descended from turn-of-the-century burlesque sketches that used plays on w...

Damkerng T.

LOL

Zhanlong Zheng

Anyone seen Transformer 4?

Damkerng T.

All right, who's on Second? Who's on First! -- LOL

@ZhanlongZheng Sorry. I've seen only its trailers.

Zhanlong Zheng

05:55

Me too hee

I might watch it.

@F.E. Are you british?

Damkerng T.

LOL (Still on the video)

> Go ahead, tell me the pitcher's name. Tomorrow.

:D

F.E.

@ZhanlongZheng I'm AmE.

Damkerng T.

LOL -- m(_ _)m

^That's me making a bow. :D

Zhanlong Zheng

Oh, it should be midnight.

F.E.

@DamkerngT. I'm not so sure if EFL speakers should actually look at that YouTube clip . . . it'll probably mess them up real bad. :( . . . :D

1 AM here.

Zhanlong Zheng

06:01

Oh, it should be midnight.

Plz consider this: I could send him an email, but I won’t.

Is this could different from that in "he could be there"?

F.E.

"I could send him an email, but I won’t."

"He could be there, but he might not."

Zhanlong Zheng

Yes, I mean this. Are these could different?

Damkerng T.

@ZhanlongZheng For me, the only way to make that sentence (I could send him an email) work is to read that could as might.

F.E.

You can take the modality out of the 2nd example: "He is there."

Zhanlong Zheng

A says "You could send him an email", and B responds "Yeah, I could send him an email, but I won't; he only checks his email about once a week. I'll phone him."

F.E.

06:10

But the speaker doesn't know if that guy is there, but thinks that guy probably is, or that there is a good chance that the guy is there, and so, uses "could".

Zhanlong Zheng

This is what StoneyB told me.

2

Q: The nuance of "could have done"

I think I could have failed this time as well. Could the above phrase mean two things? First it means that I could have failed without your help or something. So with help I could have been successful. Second it means that I have a feeling that I failed. So there's still a chance of succes...

Damkerng T.

@ZhanlongZheng A's could and B's could are different, imo.

Zhanlong Zheng

in the comments

F.E.

@DamkerngT. That would be my impression too. :)

Zhanlong Zheng

A's could represents a suggestion.

Damkerng T.

06:12

Wow, 26 more comments!

Zhanlong Zheng

could of "He could be there, but he might not." is also different from these wo, I suppose.

Hee he is a nice man.

F.E.

0

A: Can a hypothetical "could" main clause stand on its own without an expressed conditional?

Given that could refers to a hypothetical situation, how can that situation be expressed? Could is a modal auxiliary verb. It is one of the four "Diamond" modal auxiliaries: can, could, may, might Diamond modals all express the logical modal Possible. The other five modal auxiliari...

Damkerng T.

My intuition says it's different. But if I try hard enough, I think I can group He could be there and I could send him an email together.

F.E.

I thought he (John Lawler) gave a great answer. :)

Zhanlong Zheng

Yes, he did :)

Damkerng T.

06:15

Oh, where did diamond and square come from? :)

Zhanlong Zheng

That's why I think could of "Yeah, I could send him an email, but I won't; he only checks his email about once a week. I'll phone him.“ is not the same as that of "He could be there, but he might not." Am I right?

Damkerng T.

Ahh... So it's nine, not eight. (I usually forgot must when I listed modal verbs.)

Zhanlong Zheng

umich.edu/~jlawler/Modality.pdf

Lawler put the link in his answer.

Damkerng T.

@ZhanlongZheng It's better if you explain the difference you're thinking of.

Zhanlong Zheng

the first could is a pure hypothetical one while the second suggests a possible fact.

the second can be substituted for "may", but the first cannot

Damkerng T.

06:20

@ZhanlongZheng I agree. Let's hear F.E.'s opinion too.

@ZhanlongZheng I think may is fine there too.

Zhanlong Zheng

there mean the second? @DamkerngT.

Damkerng T.

@ZhanlongZheng Yes, I pointed to that message.

Zhanlong Zheng

As for the first, I think "might" is also possible but "may" isn't.

Damkerng T.

I think I can recall both sentences only vaguely now. :D

> "I could send him an email, but I won’t."
"He could be there, but he might not."

Zhanlong Zheng

@F.E. What do you make of it?

Damkerng T.

06:25

Without the but-clauses, may should work fine in both sentences. But with the but-clauses, I think using may would sound odd.

Zhanlong Zheng

Yes. As Stoney suggests, Could would be paraphrased might there, not may. But in fact could would be preferred; it implies "Nothing makes it impossible for me to send an email", as opposed to might, which would imply "I am contemplating sending an email".

F.E.

@ZhanlongZheng "I [could / might / may] send him an email." -- the "might" and "may" versions are pretty much the same ("may" might be stronger in suggesting that I actually will). In some contexts, the "could" version seems, to me, to be less likely that I'll actually send that email (I have the ability, but I probably won't).

@DamkerngT. I agree. :)

That "may" version my be just my dialect, though. :)

Suppose I'm getting annoyed, or mad, at a coworker's progress, then, I might use the "may" version to show that (instead of the neutral/default "might" version).

The "could" version seems to have a mixture of both the ability to send that email and an intention to do exactly that. As to how much of each, that depends . . .

All this is the ramblings of a tiger up after 1 AM . . . and doing it off the top of his head. :)

Damkerng T.

@F.E. As far as I can tell, my usage of may is more like AmE than BrE. I've noticed that many BrE speakers (or non-native who learned BrE) tend to think of may as asking permission.

F.E.

@DamkerngT. That's one of the "may" uses (but I think there are other uses too).

Damkerng T.

nods -- I think using may as the stronger version of might to express a possibility is less likely in BrE. (I might be wrong, though.)

F.E.

06:37

Actually, CGEL has a bit on this, that "may" and "might" are distinct verb lexemes for some speakers . . . @DamkerngT.

Damkerng T.

In any case, I think BrE seems to prefer will to may for that.

Zhanlong Zheng

I was offline right now. Too bad for the gov's censorship

F.E.

CGEL page 109: "The case of may is somewhat different: here there is evidence that for some speakers may and might have diverged to the extent that they are no longer inflectional forms of a single lexeme, but belong to distinct lexemes, may and might, each of which -- like must -- lacks a preterite; we take up this point in &9.8.4. (pages 202-3)"

Damkerng T.

@ZhanlongZheng "I was offline right now" is an odd sentence. I'm not sure if you meant you were offline and now you're back online, or you're going to be offline soon.

@F.E. The more I spend time here, the more I think I should buy CGEL. :-)

Zhanlong Zheng

no, just now

1
a very short time ago

"When did you see him?" "Just now, up at the house."

F.E.

06:44

@DamkerngT. There is a bit-mapped version online . . .

Zhanlong Zheng

from macmillan

it's my typo, sorry

Damkerng T.

@ZhanlongZheng It's all right. I wasn't trying to correct you; it's just that I wasn't sure what you meant.

Zhanlong Zheng

@DamkerngT. you can download one. I spent 4hours OCRing it so that I could search within it.

free to correct me. I DO make mistakes.

Damkerng T.

I make lots of them myself too. :D

@F.E. If only it were available as an app, and cost less than $100...

I'm sure I'm dreaming, but a robot can dream. :)

Zhanlong Zheng

1800 pages. that would kill your phone's ram and cpu :)

you can split the pdf.

chapter by chapter.

Damkerng T.

06:51

I have the first two chapters. They made them available online.

Zhanlong Zheng

I intend to buy an iphone 6 when it comes out.

Damkerng T.

Yay!

Zhanlong Zheng

seems like you respect copyright :)

Damkerng T.

It's a good thing to do, I think. :)

I bought PEU (iPad app). It was about $30, I think.

It's time for my maintenance cycle. Gotta go. See you all soon. :)

Zhanlong Zheng

too expensive. mine is $7, but it's a printed one.

Bye :)

F.E.

06:56

bye :)

Damkerng T.

08:44

sigh -- When I read answers on ELL, I sigh a lot lately.

I just hope that most learners will wear a good filter to filter out bad answers before reading answers on ELL.

And it takes more energy to correct answers than to answer questions.

Anonymous

09:04

@DamkerngT. ELL has always had some bad answers.

Anonymous

If you think an answer is bad, but for whatever reason you don't want to correct it (if you think the user will respond negatively, if it's too difficult to correct or you don't have the time or energy, etc.), then downvoting is a possible option

Damkerng T.

09:17

@snailboat Even downvotes can have some negative effects (as that paper you mentioned said). On ELL, our answerers seem to be more aggressive about downvotes. I mean, they demand the reason of the downvoting (which is usually reasonable), and sometimes even challenges the downvoters to show up (for what, I'm not sure, maybe for having an argument with :).

By the way, you look cuter today! @snailboat

Anonymous

Hee.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. People react more negatively to downvotes on Japanese.SE. T_T

Damkerng T.

Oh, no!

I wish my knowledge would be more certain. (So I could write up more useful answers.) Most of the time, I know something is off. I usually even know some options to correct it. But I don't know comprehensively about all possible alternatives.

Anonymous

Native speakers don't know everything, either. I've seen some rather odd assertions by native speakers about their own language :-)

Damkerng T.

I mean in our ELL answers when I said "something is off".^

Anonymous

09:21

But using references can help.

Damkerng T.

Hehe.

Anonymous

I know I personally depend rather heavily on references of various sorts.

Anonymous

The linguistics papers I've collected are approaching critical mass :-) There'll be 300 of them in my PDF directory soon

Anonymous

(Those are the ones I felt it was worth saving)

Damkerng T.

@snailboat Oh, are they gonna explode?!

Anonymous

09:23

I hope not!!

Anonymous

Although I use books, too, I have ling papers almost exclusively in electronic format

Anonymous

A lot of them are freely available. Others are via JSTOR or such.

Damkerng T.

Some papers on JSTOR are free, some aren't, I think.

Anonymous

Yeah, they have a system now where you can read papers for free from lots of journals, but you can't actually download them without paying

Anonymous

You can read 3 within a 2-week period.

Anonymous

09:25

But a lot of universities and libraries have access to services like JSTOR

Damkerng T.

Neat!

Anonymous

And a lot of people put papers on their websites for free.

Anonymous

Some papers or books are relatively hard to get a hold of, though.

Anonymous

I'm not going to pay $200 for someone's dissertation!

Damkerng T.

nods

Agree! (I paid $49 myself once, though. :)

Anonymous

09:27

For what?

Damkerng T.

For an acoustic phonetic paper, something very old. :D

Anonymous

Ah!

Anonymous

I have a bunch of grammar books.

Anonymous

Some of them are very useful, some are somewhat useful, some are more or less worthless

Damkerng T.

Hee.

Anonymous

09:29

One grammar of Japanese I have uses 100% real world examples, mostly from newspapers

Anonymous

It's a great source of examples, but a terrible source for theory :-)

Damkerng T.

You wouldn't believe how they displayed spectrogram before 1980s. :D

Anonymous

Uh-huh?

Damkerng T.

I guess Asciiart is inspired by those spectrogram printouts. :)

Anonymous

Haha.

Damkerng T.

09:32

@snailboat Up to this point, I still can't read even a simple web page in Japanese. But I'm patient enough. One day I will be able to. :D

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. がんばってくださいね＾＾

Damkerng T.

はーい！　ありがとうございます！

Anonymous

練習さえすれば、話せるようになるはずですね

Damkerng T.

@snailboat (I couldn't believe myself that I understand that line without any helps of Google Translate!)

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. よくやりました〜

Damkerng T.

09:40

(As for the other one, I still need its help, though. :)

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. It means something like "As long as you practice, I'm sure you'll become able to speak" :-)

Damkerng T.

Ah! I guessed wrong!

Anonymous

There's a 〜〜さえ〜〜ば grammar pattern, and a 〜〜ようになる pattern, and a 〜〜はず（だ／です） pattern

Anonymous

And 話せる（はなせる） "can speak" is the potential form of 話す（はなす） "speak"

Damkerng T.

Google Translate says, "It is supposed to be even practice, and be able to speak". So I thought it might mean, "I'm supposed to practice a lot, and soon will be able to speak." :)

I guess that this 〜〜さえ〜〜ば roughly means "As long as [doing something]".

Anonymous

09:47

A Dictionary of Intermediate Japanese Grammar defines さえ this way:

Anonymous

> An emphatic particle which expresses the idea of "even" in non-conditional clauses (or sentences) or the idea of "only" in conditional clauses

Anonymous

"If you only practice, …"

Anonymous

〜ば is a conditional form.

Damkerng T.

A-ha!

Anonymous

練習（れんしゅう）さえすれば　"If you only practice, …"

Anonymous

09:48

話せる（はなせる）　"Can speak"

Anonymous

話せるようになる　"Become able to speak"

Anonymous

A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar defines はず this way:

Anonymous

> a dependent noun which expresses the speaker's expectation that s.t. will take place or took place or that s.o. / s.t. is or was in some state

Anonymous

"I expect that 〜; It is expected that 〜; 〜 is expected to; I am fairly certain that 〜; should; ought to; It is natural that 〜; No wonder 〜"

Anonymous

はず is usually followed by だ or です.

Damkerng T.

09:51

Is はず considered a particle?

Anonymous

It is a grammaticalized noun.

Damkerng T.

(It sounds like one in Thai. I might misunderstand it, though.)

Anonymous

It literally refers to the nock of a bow

Anonymous

But it's lost its literal meaning here

Anonymous

And it's become a grammatical word.

Anonymous

09:52

Grammatically speaking, it still functions much like a noun, but it can't appear on its own--it has to be modified by a relative clause

Anonymous

Basically, you put a sentence (like 話せるようになる) before it, and it adds modal meaning

Anonymous

So 練習さえすれば、話せるようになる would be a complete sentence on its own

Anonymous

"If you only practice, you'll become able to speak [Japanese]"

Anonymous

(In kana: れんしゅう　さえ　すれば、はなせる　ように　なる)

Anonymous

But 〜〜はずだ adds modal meaning, expressing my relative certainty

Anonymous

09:54

And I used です instead of だ, which is polite;

Anonymous

and I added ね because I feel it is a proposition that's easy for us to agree on :-)

Anonymous

I think ね makes it slightly nicer, putting us on the same ground

Damkerng T.

Ahh... This is very nice! Thank you very much!

Anonymous

いあいあ＾＾

Anonymous

にほんごって、たのしいですよね＾＾

Damkerng T.

09:56

(I refrain from starring them, but I copied them already. :)

Anonymous

って is an informal topic particle (literally a quotative particle)

Anonymous

I'm being a little bit informal but polite

Damkerng T.

たのしいです！

Anonymous

10:09

My snails are all asleep.

Damkerng T.

My cat too!

Anonymous

Is that website in Thai difficult because of the kanji?

Anonymous

My hope was that the audio files might help :-)

Anonymous

I personally just sort of learn kanji as I learn words.

Anonymous

So I would learn that 私 is わたし

Damkerng T.

10:20

Hmm... I think that website is very learner-friendly. :)

Anonymous

Oh, good!

Anonymous

How do you feel about Japanese so far? :-)

Anonymous

I edited this question to make the reductions explicit, based on the OP's comment:

Anonymous

5

Q: Which parts of speech does Conjunction Reduction work with?

Which parts of speech does Conjunction Reduction work with? (and which parts doesn't?) Does it work with identifiers and adjectives before a noun? 1a. the two running men and the two running women 1b. the two running men and women I think 1b means there are two identified running me...

grammar conjunctions

Damkerng T.

It's strange that I think the lessons for Thai-native learners are better than the ones for English-native learners.

Anonymous

10:21

I didn't really look at the English page on that site

Damkerng T.

@snailboat It's fun. But it's different from English.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. That's true! :-)

Damkerng T.

@snailboat I like your edit. It makes the question look much better.

Anonymous

Conjunction Reduction is a rather specific theoretical term.

Anonymous

It's used rather widely, including by some linguists who analyze it differently (that is, not as ellipsis), but not universally

Damkerng T.

10:23

Ahh... I see. I think the gmod (grammar module) is only available in Thai, which is great!

Anonymous

I think that in a question about it, it's important to make the concept (reduction of repeated material triggered by the presence of a conjunction) explicit

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. Ahh!

Anonymous

I can point you to standard references in English if you like.

Anonymous

The most popular grammar books are the three volumes by Makino et al., A Dictionary of Basic/Intermediate/Advanced Japanese Grammar

Anonymous

If I were going to make an analogy to books available in English, I might liken them to Swan's book :-)

Damkerng T.

10:25

I think I could use their website for quite a while. (They have 24-time and 48-time courses, along with ステップ名から探す.)

Anonymous

They're about 650, 750, and 800 pages respectively.

Anonymous

But each one is arranged as a dictionary.

user116848

Hello guys

user116848

How are you both :D

Anonymous

Intermediate has an index listing terms in the first two books; Advanced has an index listing terms in all three

Anonymous

10:25

Hello!

Damkerng T.

@snailboat Grammar as a dictionary would sound like PEU. :D

Hello!

user116848

So snailboat changed his avatar I see :)

Anonymous

I am not a his.

user116848

So you a she?

Anonymous

Yes, although in this context it would be a her :-)

user116848

10:27

Oh I see. Sorry until now I thought of you as a dude :)

user116848

Damks you a she?

user116848

Or a he? :)

Damkerng T.

I'm male. :)

Anonymous

You can think of me however you like! But please address me as a not-a-dude :-)

user116848

@snailboat Agreed haha

user116848

10:29

Damks FE a she or a he? :) Just asking.

user116848

Never asked him though

Damkerng T.

I'm not sure. You can ask F.E. that yourself. :D

user116848

You are kidding right. I know you know. :D

Damkerng T.

No, I don't. Really.

user116848

I guess he is a dude :)

user116848

10:31

Well whatever it is he is a good man :)

user116848

11:14

@F.E. You a he or she? :) (I think you are a male right?) :D

Maulik V

12:26

Hello Crystal or Damkerng...(whoever sees this first!). I'm stuck up with this sentence. Kindly paraphrase - Damian raised an eyebrow, not about to humor the otherworldly harbinger of bad news.

Damkerng T.

@MaulikV It's an odd sentence.

Anonymous

What in that sentence do you have trouble with?

Anonymous

12:42

Damian raised an eyebrow. He was not about to humor [someone described as "the otherworldly harbinger of bad news"].

Anonymous

Is it the about to? Something else?

Damkerng T.

I wonder why the writer dropped the verb be. Perhaps they used the poetic license.

Obviously, this is not a technical writing. :D

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. There's no need for be.

Damkerng T.

> “Our troops have consolidated at the reserve lines of defense, in an organized way and having kept their weaponry. We were prepared for this option, as we have to face tens of thousands of Kiev's military men and hundreds of armored weaponry units – which means almost all the battle-ready Ukrainian army,” Boroday said.

@snailboat Is this elision?

Anonymous

No

Anonymous

12:45

Well, unless you want to analyze it that way.

Damkerng T.

It's difficult for me to analyze it any other way.

A-ha! This seems to work.

> Damian, not about to humor the otherworldly harbinger of bad news, raised an eyebrow.

Kinda a renamer (or whatever a more suitable term would be).

Anonymous

Yeah, your version is pretty similar.

Damkerng T.

Shifting it like that makes it very easy for me to read.

Anonymous

> Furious, he stormed out of the room.

Anonymous

> He stormed out of the room, furious.

Damkerng T.

12:53

> He, furious, stormed out of the room.

Hee. :D

Anonymous

That sentence would be better if it weren't a pronoun :-)

Anonymous

Personal pronouns aren't very good at taking stress.

Damkerng T.

Ahh... Indeed!

But what would CGEL call this kind of phrase?

Anonymous

It's a predicative adjunct. We can tell it's an adjunct because it's a supplement that isn't a necessary part of the sentence. It can be removed. We can tell it's predicative because it predicates on the subject Damian

Anonymous

> Disgusted at his betrayal, she went back to Paris.

Anonymous

13:01

Here, the bolded phrase predicates on she, the matrix subject

Damkerng T.

A-ha! Thank you very much!

Anonymous

About is a little unusual.

Damkerng T.

But if we read it as a predicate (or predicative), it would be fine.

Anonymous

It is (semantically) a predicate

Anonymous

It has a predicand.

Anonymous

13:07

Be about to is unusual. Some people call it semi-auxiliary or semi-modal.

Anonymous

Same with be going to.

Anonymous

But neither of those strings is actually an auxiliary, modal or otherwise

Anonymous

Quirk et al. refer to both as semi-auxiliaries

Anonymous

I don't think H&P describe be about to at all

Anonymous

Syntactically, I would say about there is an adjective

Anonymous

13:09

And it heads, in our example, an AdjP with predicative adjunct function (in CGEL's terms)

Anonymous

As you can see, be isn't a necessary part to make it work.

Damkerng T.

nods

Anonymous

If I say "Damian is about to leave", it's preceded by be for the same reason any AdjP would be, because an AdjP on its own isn't a tense-bearing predicator―it needs a verb

Anonymous

Hopefully it's clear why I don't think Maulik's example as containing ellipsis :-)

Damkerng T.

You had me at furious. :-)

Anonymous

13:13

Yay

Damkerng T.

Gotta go. Be back later.

user8153

13:25

@snailboat Just be as God directs you. Is this grammatical?

Transcript for

English Language Learners