English Language Learners

F.E.

06:00

. . . scratch . . .

user116848

06:53

. . . . whoosh . . . .

user116848

sound of an arrow :D

user116848

Yay! I found my signature here.

user116848

But I am not fast in real life :(

user116848

Later!

skullpatrol

07:36

later pal :-)

Anonymous

16:12

@Nico Punctual and non-durative include the same sets of things.

Nico

17:37

@snailboat Is it not possible for a verb to not define whether the action is durative or not?

Anonymous

Well, you could say the durative/punctual contrast isn't relevant all of the time.

Nico

...Nico thinking of an example...

Anonymous

But I would say stative verbs have duration.

Nico

BTW I'm happy to see you back (did you feel the earthquake?)

Anonymous

Yes, my house shook around for a minute or so :-)

Anonymous

17:41

I'm fine!

Anonymous

Although verbs have associated aspects, really we're concerned with the situations expressed by entire predicates, including not only the verb but adjuncts like "for an hour", etc.

Nico

My experience with earthquakes is very limited. I've managed to sleep through all of them.

Anonymous

Jun 6 at 0:06, by snailboat

> John ate soup (-telic) for 10 minutes (-telic).
> *John ate soup (-telic) in 10 minutes (+telic).
> *John ate two apples (+telic) for 10 minutes (-telic).
> John ate two apples (+telic) in 10 minutes (+telic).

Nico

Interesting example

Anonymous

So simply placing verbs into "durative" and "non-durative" or "telic" and "atelic" categories is no good. You have to look at the entire sentence.

Anonymous

17:48

It's best if we consider things like durative and non-durative as meanings (as semantic categories), and then look at how forms line up with those meanings

StoneyB

Why are as clauses so difficult for our users? First meatie, now Le Pressentiment ... I'm missing something obvious.

Nico

This reminds me of Polish. They have pairs of verbs that mean the same like pomóc and pomagać but the latter one describes an action with the perfect aspect.

@StoneyB "as" is small word that combines with other, sometimes in unexpected ways :)

(cont.) Not every language does that, and for that reason, we shouldn't expect a verb is always "durative" or not, "tellic or not.

Anonymous

1

Q: Why no subject after “as”?

Please correct me, but does as function as a conjunction here? I already tried i, ii, and iii. Page 3: In any event it might be said that Hart ‘won’ the debate in the sense that it was his infl uence that led to the passing of the 1960s legislation liberalising the law on abortion, prosti...

Anonymous

As does appear to be followed by a clause without an overt subject, and the question of why the subject is missing (and whether or not you can add it back in) is a good one

Anonymous

We talked about this before once

Anonymous

18:00

It does seem like a tricky subject. I've looked through both CGEL and Quirk et al and I was never entirely satisfied with either account

StoneyB

CGEL treats this as the same as as (!) you find in same ... as, such ... as, as ... as - a comparativve construction, and my gut feel is that that's the historical fact that creates this. But I'm reluctant to drag OE/ME/EModE into this picture.

@snailboat You're creeping dangerously close to my position, that form does not express meaning but merely establishes boundaries within which meaning must be inferred.

Nico

> go as fast as you can
> it tasted like grape juice but not as sweet
> as she grew older, she kept more to herself
> as you can see, I didn’t go after all
> I must stop now as I have to go out
> sweet as he is, he doesn’t pay his bills
> as for you, you’d better be quick
> she behaved as if he weren’t there
> I’ve got enough on my plate as [it] is
> as of January 1, a free market will be created
> decisions as to which patients receive treatment
> the damage is as yet undetermined
> We Might As Well Win

StoneyB

@Nico Well, as isn't a determiner, so it must be a preposition. Nothing else causes so many problems.

Nico

@StoneyB My poor-man interpretation is that the dummy proun "it" in that sentence has been removed because "as" already satisfies the need for a subject.

Similar to:

> I’ve got enough on my plate as [it] is

...Nico reading StoneyB's answer...

StoneyB

I'm pretty sure CGEL is right, that it's a comparative: colloquial use replaces as with like.

Anonymous

18:16

@Nico But there as it is is fine.

Nico

I take that means that in the OP's examples it isn't optional to keep the dummy pronoun.

StoneyB

Yeah, I don't think there are missing dummies in OP's examples. The subjects - what was seen, what was evident - are clear enough, so it would be anaphoric, not expletive.

In fact, CGEL observes that as clauses like this are remarkably similar to relatives.

Damkerng T.

19:09

A robot is whirring by...

> However such issues can still arise – as was seen in the Brown case, considered later, and the ongoing issue of the ‘rights’ relating to assisted suicide...

Interesting!

> (original) However such issues can still arise – as was seen in the Brown case, ...

> However such issues can still arise – as (it) was seen in the Brown case, ...

> (passive removed) However we saw that such issues can still arise in the Brown case, ...

Hmm... Somehow I don't like the last one.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. What does the it in parentheses represent?

user116848

Hello!

user116848

robot and snail

Damkerng T.

19:28

@snailboat I think it means "(that) such issues can still arise".

Anonymous

I'm not talking about what the word refers to

Damkerng T.

I was about to add another version but the chat was down.

@snailboat Eh?

> (passive removed) However as we saw in the Brown case, such issues can still arise, ...

Anonymous

I was curious what the parentheses meant

Damkerng T.

I think I like this^ version better.

Ahh... My italicized parentheses would be normal ones: you can read the text either with or without what inside the parentheses.

Anonymous

Oh

Anonymous

19:31

I think adding it makes it ungrammatical

Damkerng T.

Hmm... Interesting!

Actually, I had another version.

> However such issues can still arise – as (was) seen in the Brown case, ...

user116848

"I don't know" and "I wouldn't know" can be used interchangeably?

Damkerng T.

Probably not always.

user116848

Or the latter is only concerned with 'willingness'

Damkerng T.

I think the latter is more speculative.

user116848

19:37

meaning?

Damkerng T.

> How would I know?

> I wouldn't know.

user116848

Mm

Anonymous

It's difficult to evaluate your incomplete sentences

user116848

mine?

Anonymous

Because it's possible for variations on "as was seen in the Brown case" to be cataphoric, depending on a following main clause

Anonymous

19:40

@Arrowfar No

user116848

Phew

Damkerng T.

@snailboat I don't have the complete sentence.

(It would be nice if the OP gave the complete sentence.)

Anonymous

In the original, we have all we need

Anonymous

@Arrowfar Can "I don't know" and "I wouldn't know" ~~can~~ be used interchangeably?

user116848

@snailboat So my structure wasn't grammatical? But I see these type of questions by natives too. So?

Anonymous

19:42

So, you're failing to recognize when declarative questions are appropriate.

user116848

Yes. Please tell

user116848

In informal situations?

Anonymous

You can't just use a declarative form instead of an interrogative one because the context is informal

user116848

So when then?

Anonymous

If you'd like, go ask a question on ELL

user116848

19:45

Or ELU?

Anonymous

You can do whatever you'd like

Anonymous

But it's a learner's problem

user116848

So I can't get an answer here you mean?

user116848

It's okay

Anonymous

Native speakers automatically know when to use interrogative and declarative forms and, generally speaking, have absolutely no idea how to describe when to do so

Damkerng T.

19:45

@Arrowfar Usually, you can use the declarative form to mirror a fact or an idea that was just being said.

user116848

okay.

clinch

generally speaking, natives don't really have an idea of how their language works, but that's okay

they can still speak it perfectly ^^

Damkerng T.

I'm not sure if that covers all the cases.

(I mean, I usually don't write down all possible cases to memorize. :-)

The chat maintenance today was not very long. (I think it was less than 2-3 minutes.)

Anonymous

@clinch Yeah, native speakers can speak their language fine, generally speaking.

Anonymous

But my point is that a native speaker would never need to ask the question, and ELU seems to not like questions that native speakers wouldn't need to ask

Anonymous

19:50

Which is why I said ELL instead of ELU.

Anonymous

Although of course people are free to ask questions where they'd like!

Anonymous

It wasn't maintenance

Anonymous

Someone goofed up is all.

Damkerng T.

Ahh

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. I've written the list enough times now that I think I can do it from memory :-)

user116848

19:51

If I don't get a good answer here on ELL and want to move my question to ELU can I do it?

Damkerng T.

@snailboat Hah!

user116848

Because I flagged one Qs of mine with this issue but didn't get any response

Anonymous

Yeah, you can say something like "My question wasn't satisfactorily answered on ELL, so now I'm posting here"

Anonymous

I remember one particular question where the OP did so and their question was welcomed on ELU

user116848

So it wouldn't be marked as a duped?

Anonymous

19:53

Questions can't be marked as duplicates cross-site

Anonymous

SE doesn't support that

user116848

So I can ask the same Qs again on ELU. I see. I am gonna do that. I thought it would be duped. thanks

user116848

@snailboat But I remember doing that and got this message "Please don't cross posts between ELL and ELU". So why is that?

user116848

But I did it only once.

user116848

Any ideas why I got that response then?

Anonymous

19:58

@Arrowfar If you just post one question to both sites at the same time, it's considered abusive

Anonymous

If you post to one site, and in the end you find it's not answered to your satisfaction, and then you take the time to tailor your post to another community, post it there, and mention the previous post, that is quite a bit different

Damkerng T.

0

Q: Where can I find some default rules to generate WH-questions ( Who, What, Where, Which, When, Why and How )?

I have some categories for English words ( PERSON - Person ORG - Organization LOC - Location TIME - Time LAW - Law NORP - Nationality GPE - Geopolitical Entity LANGUAGE - Language PERCENT - Percentage FAC - Facility PRODUCT - Product ORDINAL - Ordinal Number CARDINAL - Cardinal Number WORK OF AR...

questions

It's rare that I will say "I know every word but don't know the meaning", but this is perhaps it.

clinch

@snailboat not just fine, but perfectly ;D

Anonymous

@clinch Nope!

Damkerng T.

@clinch Considering what happens in my first language, I would say that fine is better than perfectly. :)

Anonymous

20:05

People make mistakes all the time. :-)

clinch

alright, alright, they speak their variant of the language perfectly

Anonymous

Nope!

Anonymous

People make mistakes all the time.

clinch

but anyway, this isn't really relevant to the conversation, and i don't want to get into this discussion right now ^^

this is like the vim vs emacs of linguistics, except, people who think natives do make mistakes are wrong :P

Anonymous

Huh?

Anonymous

20:07

You've never made a mistake in your own language?

Anonymous

That's ridiculous.

Anonymous

→ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…

Anonymous

These are all errors made by native speakers.

Anonymous

If a native speaker makes an error, and if you ask them on reflection whether it was an error and they agree, what do you have to gain by pretending they're wrong?

Anonymous

If I mean to say that something is interesting and "interested" comes out of my mouth, how is that not an error?

Anonymous

20:08

Your claim is flatly wrong.

clinch

well, slip ups and similar mistakes are a different issue

Damkerng T.

Imagining a politician after his lunch running into a reporter shooting a question that needs an unprepared answer...

Anonymous

Oh, so mistakes don't count as mistakes ;-)

Anonymous

I see.

clinch

are you purposely misunderstanding what i'm saying? I'm not saying no one has ever stumbled while speaking and similar issues. I'm saying natives are who define the language and saying that they don't speak their variant of the language perfectly is simply wrong

Anonymous

20:10

Yes, and your sentence is nonsensical

Anonymous

I understand what you're saying, it just doesn't make any sense.

clinch

k.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. This doesn't look like a typical ELL question. :-)

Damkerng T.

I really can't tell what they are asking!

user116848

0

Q: 'declarative' questions and 'interrogative' questions (When to use which?)

Declarative questions: 'Boss' and 'Manager' can be used interchangeably? She is going there tomorrow? AND Interrogative questions: Can 'Boss' and 'Manager' be used interchangeably? Is she going there tomorrow? So my question is when to use the above type of questions (declarative) and whe...

questions

Anonymous

20:15

au.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20140825103340AAGYEHe

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. They want to write a program to generate sentences, seems like.

Anonymous

I didn't say I don't know the rules. I'm just too lazy to do any teaching at the moment. My head hurts.

Damkerng T.

Ahh... (Still don't have an exact idea of such a program, though.)

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. It's rather unclear.

user116848

Then you can answer my Qs there whenever you feel like in the future.

user116848

20:19

(If your head is hurting now :-) )

Anonymous

It is.

Damkerng T.

@Arrowfar "But that person also said that she doesn't know the rules regarding this, and just 'know it'. So any ideas when to use which structure of question?" -- I think it would be better if you could be a little more careful when quoting someone else next time.

Inaccurate quoting could be an issue.

user116848

@DamkerngT. But they don't know who or where, right. That person could be anyone, and I had to write that to show that I did some research. I can't delete that part. I can say 'he' ofcourse

skullpatrol

in Mathematics, 9 mins ago, by robjohn

A minor firewall change had some very ill effects, we have reverted and are digging into the issue.

Tweeted by StackStatus on August 25, 2014 at 7:36 PM

Damkerng T.

@Arrowfar Isn't that challenging--being accurate and achieving your goal at the same time? :-)

@skullpatrol That must be the reason why I was disconnected from the chat a short while ago.

skullpatrol

20:25

@DamkerngT. Me too :(

user116848

@DamkerngT. No it's not :-) But I thought she didn't know the rules. So what can I write to show that I asked some native first??

user116848

I was disconnected too

user116848

:)

Damkerng T.

How about this? "But that person also said that she ~~doesn't know the rules regarding this, and~~ just 'know it'. So any ideas when to use which structure of question?"

Or...

"But that person also said something that made me think that she doesn't know the rules regarding this, and just 'know it'. So any ideas when to use which structure of question?"

user116848

Ahh. I'll go and change it. Thanks :-)

Damkerng T.

20:26

No problem. :)

user116848

@DamkerngT. But in the second one 'What 'something' did she say?' someone might ask me. So? :-)

Damkerng T.

If you're ready to clarify, then it would be fine, too. :)

@Arrowfar Ah, I just noticed. Probably 'knows it'.

F.E.

> Although I used to use them both in any situation but some time ago a native speaker pointed out that you can't use both of them in any situation. ~~But that person also said that he doesn't know the rules regarding this, and just 'know it'.~~ So any ideas when to use which structure of question?

(cont.) You probably ought to format your 4 examples (e.g. indent and number them).

Damkerng T.

@snailboat Ah, just saw the earthquake being mentioned! I'm glad that everyone is okay.

@F.E. Did you feel the earthquake today too?

F.E.

@DamkerngT. Nope. Don't live in CA no more.

Damkerng T.

20:34

Ahh

user116848

@F.E. Hello. Cut me some slack!. I am keeping my question as it is :-) (I can't follow everyone's suggestion). You can answer there if you like.

F.E.

@Arrowfar You've been cut too much slack, probably your whole life.

user116848

What do you mean? :-)

F.E.

You're going to have to learn how much info to give when it hasn't been asked for.

Everyone, er, usually everyone, ends up learning that lesson the hard way.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. I live too far from the epicenter for it to have caused any real damage :-)

F.E.

20:37

( cont.) When you answers to specific questions, then you need to know what to say, and what not to say.

Damkerng T.

@snailboat Phew! -- Was it a little scary?

F.E.

(cont.) To much extraneous info doesn't usually help, and often merely leads potential answers astray.

(cont.) This is a domain when conciseness is a big advantage -- when asking questions.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. Yeah, earthquakes are always a little scary. If nothing else, the odds of another one are significantly higher directly afterwards

Anonymous

Sometimes really big earthquakes have smaller earthquakes not long beforehand

Anonymous

The earthquake woke most everyone up, but it didn't do any real damage here.

Anonymous

20:41

Besides loss of sleep ;-)

Damkerng T.

@snailboat Still better than any real damages. :) -- I don't have much first-hand experience of earthquakes.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. It's okay, I don't mind whatever the question says

Damkerng T.

That's very kind of you. :)

user116848

@DamkerngT. You are making me feel like a bad person here.

Damkerng T.

Anyway, I think misquoting is one of the problems on ELL.

user116848

20:47

Little things (rolls eyes)

user116848

Oh, but rolls eyes in a manly fashion

Anonymous

How do you make eye rolls manlier?

user116848

Well, I can't find any video to show you.

Damkerng T.

@Arrowfar I'm sorry if I made you feel bad, but for what it is worth, it was in good faith.

user116848

@DamkerngT. Yeah it's okay. No worries :-)

user116848

20:52

Can 'Don't sweat it', 'Don't worry about it', and 'No worries' be used interchangeably?

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. Well, it was a misunderstanding in good faith.

Anonymous

At the time, I was trying to explain why I suggested ELL rather than ELU

Anonymous

And so I was trying to illustrate that it wasn't the sort of thing native speakers generally need to ask about or even know about consciously

Anonymous

I think no worries is the youngest sounding phrase

user116848

Oh, C'mon I wrote he in my question! Seriously I am hating nitty gritty of 'who said what' now!

Anonymous

20:54

Don't sweat it sounds informal too, but I associate it with slightly older speakers on average. (This is just my subjective impression)

Anonymous

I haven't looked at your question since you changed it

Anonymous

I don't mind whatever you wrote

Anonymous

I'm not trying to give you a hard time

Anonymous

I was in fact trying to show that it was a misunderstanding made in good faith and not something you need to apologize for

Anonymous

"Don't worry about it" isn't particularly formal, but I think it's less informal than the other two

Anonymous

20:56

When you say ahem ahem, it's not actually any less rude than saying whatever you were thinking

Anonymous

That is to say, them's fightin' words.

user116848

I am dead here I guess.

Anonymous

So I don't think those three phrases are entirely interchangeable

Anonymous

I can easily imagine someone who says "Don't worry about it" but would never say "No worries"

Anonymous

In terms of meaning, "Don't worry about it" can also be used to mean something like "Please don't do that thing for me, I will do it myself"

Anonymous

20:58

I am going to go take a break from my computer

Anonymous

Have a good morning / very late evening!

user116848

Bye!

user116848

21:30

This all reminds me of a song :-)

user116848

►

user116848

;)

user116848

See ya guys :-)

Transcript for

English Language Learners