July 9, 2013 at 9:12 am
GilaMonster (7/9/2013)
wolfkillj (7/9/2013)
At first, I thought Gail must be psychic to know which page I was trying to link, but I'm only slightly less impressed that she thought it worth viewing the source code of the page to figure it out!I hit 'quote' on your post.
Well, that sticks a pin in my hero-worship balloon, but thanks for pulling out the correct link anyway!
Jason Wolfkill
July 9, 2013 at 12:02 pm
WHAT HAPPENED TO THE FORUMS?
I go away for a couple hours and everything gets moved around! I *LIKED* the furniture where it was, my chair was in just the right spot to catch the sun in the afternoon to keep me toasty during my naps!
😉
July 9, 2013 at 2:32 pm
ok if anybody has some answers on my off the wall post here, i'd appreciate it: this is more of a "heard of an app that does this"? question:
"Throw it on the Big Screen" Like on NCIS tv show
obviously, if they can do it on a TV show, we can do it in our office. 😛
Lowell
July 9, 2013 at 2:36 pm
L' Eomot Inversé (7/9/2013)
Koen Verbeeck (7/9/2013)
Brandie Tarvin (7/8/2013)
Koen Verbeeck (7/6/2013)
It was closed the week we were there for maintenance...Wait. You were there for maintenance and it was closed ... so you couldn't do your maintenance?
(Grammar humor strikes again! @=)
Yeah sure, laugh with the non-native English speaker 😛
You shouldn't tease and tweak us like that, Koen.
Given that Flemish is a Germanic language with supposedly a lot of grammar and syntax in common with English and German, and German is further from English than Flemish is, it seems interesting that only tiny changes in the English wording (apart from vocab change, of course) to get "Es war der Woche geschlossen, in denen wir dort für Wartungsarbeiten waren" in German. My German is very rusty, so I guess that may not be quite right; the tiny changes consist in moving "geschlossen" to the end of its clause, "waren" to the end of its subordinate clause and restoring the elided "for which" (in denen) that is normally omitted in informal English. I think that in informal German waren would come immediately after "dort", but my schooling was of course in formal German and my acquaintance with informal German was too long ago, so I'm playing safe. Now I can't see how the German would be interpreted any way other that the way Brandie interpreted your English, so I strongly suspect that if it were written that way in Flemish the same interpretation would be natural too. So I suspect you are pulling our leg with your non-native speaker comment. Now if I spoke Dutch that suspicion might be confirmed, or denied - but I don't even know enough Dutch to understand how smileys work in the written form of that language.
Anyway, educated Flemish and Dutch people have a great advantage over most Americans and English when interpreting written English: their knowledge of the language's vocabulary, syntax, and grammar is usually far better that that of the typical English or American university graduate, because they learn it in school; the teaching of English grammar and syntax in most schools in Britain and the USA was abandoned as being far too difficult for the poor little kiddies decades ago.
The smiley means: "OK you got me, I should've reread my sentence and cought that mistake. But since I only check for typos - my grammer is normally better than 90% of the non-native English speakers on forums like these - I usually don't catch subtle grammar mistakes. So I instead I play the 'Hey I know nothing, I'm from Barcelona' card." All in one little smiley 😀
Given the sentence "It was closed the week we were there for maintenance", we would construct the phrase normally like this in Dutch:
"In the week we were there, it was closed for maintenance". My original sentence could also be used but it can indeed lead to grammatical confusion.
"Het was gesloten in de week dat we er waren voor onderhoud" (although more spoken language than written language)
If we really meant that we were there to do maintenance ourselves, we would say it more like this:
"Het was gesloten in de week dat we er waren om onderhoud te doen" I'm pretty sure there's a grammatical term for the difference between "voor onderhoud" en "om onderhoud te doen", like ablative or dative, but it has been way too long ago since I've dealt with grammatical cases.
Need an answer? No, you need a question
My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP
July 9, 2013 at 7:17 pm
Koen Verbeeck (7/9/2013)
The smiley means: "OK you got me, I should've reread my sentence and cought that mistake. But since I only check for typos - my grammer is normally better than 90% of the non-native English speakers on forums like these - I usually don't catch subtle grammar mistakes. So I instead I play the 'Hey I know nothing, I'm from Barcelona' card." All in one little smiley 😀
I thought it did, but I couldn't admit that while pretending it didn't, could I? 😛
But I don't think it's a grammar mistake. I see both "in order to do maintenance" and "for maintenance" as adverb phrases (specifically adverbs of purpose) so they are grammatically the same. I think there's an issue of semantics as opposed to of grammar: "in order to do maintenance" (om ... te doen) requires that "do" have the same subject as the verb that it, as an adverb, qualifies - which, in order for that subject matching to make sense, can be a verb other than the closest one in the word order of the containing sentence; while "for maintenance" (voor ...) doesn't require that the subject of the implied verb "maintain" be specified, it's an impersonal form, so it has a strong tendency to adhere to the nearest verb. This may be less true in Dutch/Flemish than it is in English, of course - I don't claim to have any understanding of that language/those languages (help - is it politically correct to call them one language, or two?)
Tom
July 10, 2013 at 5:33 am
L' Eomot Inversé (7/9/2013)
Koen Verbeeck (7/9/2013)
The smiley means: "OK you got me, I should've reread my sentence and cought that mistake. But since I only check for typos - my grammer is normally better than 90% of the non-native English speakers on forums like these - I usually don't catch subtle grammar mistakes. So I instead I play the 'Hey I know nothing, I'm from Barcelona' card." All in one little smiley 😀I thought it did, but I couldn't admit that while pretending it didn't, could I? 😛
But I don't think it's a grammar mistake. I see both "in order to do maintenance" and "for maintenance" as adverb phrases (specifically adverbs of purpose) so they are grammatically the same. I think there's an issue of semantics as opposed to of grammar:
The sentence is "It was closed the week we were there for maintenance."
The way I was taught English is the prepositional phrase modifies the phrase right before it. So the words "for maintenance" modifies "we were there" as opposed to the phrase "It was closed".
This is also the way I read it as both an author and an editor. So no, it's not really symantics here so much as an interpretation of American English grammar rules. Though I do admit that British English grammar rules may be different in regards to modification of nouns, verbs, and other phrases.
July 10, 2013 at 7:40 am
Brandie Tarvin (7/10/2013)
The way I was taught English ...
Hang on... you actually paid attention? :w00t:
Wayne
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server 2008
Author - SQL Server T-SQL Recipes
July 10, 2013 at 7:43 am
WayneS (7/10/2013)
Brandie Tarvin (7/10/2013)
The way I was taught English ...Hang on... you actually paid attention? :w00t:
I used to love sentence diagramming. I think it led to my love of design schematics.
--------------------------------------
When you encounter a problem, if the solution isn't readily evident go back to the start and check your assumptions.
--------------------------------------
It’s unpleasantly like being drunk.
What’s so unpleasant about being drunk?
You ask a glass of water. -- Douglas Adams
July 10, 2013 at 7:47 am
WayneS (7/10/2013)
Brandie Tarvin (7/10/2013)
The way I was taught English ...Hang on... you actually paid attention? :w00t:
Not like I had a choice (see below).
Stefan Krzywicki (7/10/2013)
I used to love sentence diagramming. I think it led to my love of design schematics.
Our school district made us do sentence diagramming every freakin' year. EVERY year.
July 10, 2013 at 7:48 am
Brandie Tarvin (7/10/2013)
WayneS (7/10/2013)
Brandie Tarvin (7/10/2013)
The way I was taught English ...Hang on... you actually paid attention? :w00t:
Not like I had a choice (see below).
Stefan Krzywicki (7/10/2013)
I used to love sentence diagramming. I think it led to my love of design schematics.Our school district made us do sentence diagramming every freakin' year. EVERY year.
Wow. I think we only did it one year.
--------------------------------------
When you encounter a problem, if the solution isn't readily evident go back to the start and check your assumptions.
--------------------------------------
It’s unpleasantly like being drunk.
What’s so unpleasant about being drunk?
You ask a glass of water. -- Douglas Adams
July 10, 2013 at 7:55 am
Starting tomorrow and running through Sunday is Readercon in Burlington, MA just outside Boston. This is a local SF convention that I'm helping run this year. Wow this is a lot of work. : -) Wish me luck! If anyone's in the area, stop in. Thursday night is free!
This con focuses on the literary side of SF, so we don't do much on movies and tv and we don't get many people in costumes, but it is still a lot of fun.
We decided we wanted a welcome banner this year, so I designed an 8' wide banner and ordered it on-line. Then I tried to get a stand, they're all like $250! I was trying to figure out how to build one. I can't weld, so metal seemed wobbly and I thought a wooden one would look like crap, then my wife Emily had a brilliant idea: PVC pipe! Easy to put together and take apart again, clean-looking and cheap! Just one of the fun bits of running a con. : -)
--------------------------------------
When you encounter a problem, if the solution isn't readily evident go back to the start and check your assumptions.
--------------------------------------
It’s unpleasantly like being drunk.
What’s so unpleasant about being drunk?
You ask a glass of water. -- Douglas Adams
July 10, 2013 at 9:36 am
Stefan Krzywicki (7/10/2013)
Starting tomorrow and running through Sunday is Readercon in Burlington, MA just outside Boston. This is a local SF convention that I'm helping run this year. Wow this is a lot of work. : -) Wish me luck! If anyone's in the area, stop in. Thursday night is free!This con focuses on the literary side of SF, so we don't do much on movies and tv and we don't get many people in costumes, but it is still a lot of fun.
We decided we wanted a welcome banner this year, so I designed an 8' wide banner and ordered it on-line. Then I tried to get a stand, they're all like $250! I was trying to figure out how to build one. I can't weld, so metal seemed wobbly and I thought a wooden one would look like crap, then my wife Emily had a brilliant idea: PVC pipe! Easy to put together and take apart again, clean-looking and cheap! Just one of the fun bits of running a con. : -)
Wow, thanks for this! It's been years since I've attended a con - they just got too big and...too big! Of course, I can't go this year, but now that it's on my radar, I will bookmark the site and check it out next year. Is it always in Burlington? Because that's really convenient!!
Thanks again --
Donna
July 10, 2013 at 9:41 am
dbursey (7/10/2013)
Stefan Krzywicki (7/10/2013)
Starting tomorrow and running through Sunday is Readercon in Burlington, MA just outside Boston. This is a local SF convention that I'm helping run this year. Wow this is a lot of work. : -) Wish me luck! If anyone's in the area, stop in. Thursday night is free!This con focuses on the literary side of SF, so we don't do much on movies and tv and we don't get many people in costumes, but it is still a lot of fun.
We decided we wanted a welcome banner this year, so I designed an 8' wide banner and ordered it on-line. Then I tried to get a stand, they're all like $250! I was trying to figure out how to build one. I can't weld, so metal seemed wobbly and I thought a wooden one would look like crap, then my wife Emily had a brilliant idea: PVC pipe! Easy to put together and take apart again, clean-looking and cheap! Just one of the fun bits of running a con. : -)
Wow, thanks for this! It's been years since I've attended a con - they just got too big and...too big! Of course, I can't go this year, but now that it's on my radar, I will bookmark the site and check it out next year. Is it always in Burlington? Because that's really convenient!!
Thanks again --
Donna
It is always in Burlington. You'll probably find this convention isn't "too big" there's around 800 people and 6 rooms of programming.
Sorry you can't make it this year. Thursday night is always free if you have the time!
--------------------------------------
When you encounter a problem, if the solution isn't readily evident go back to the start and check your assumptions.
--------------------------------------
It’s unpleasantly like being drunk.
What’s so unpleasant about being drunk?
You ask a glass of water. -- Douglas Adams
July 10, 2013 at 10:09 am
Brandie Tarvin (7/10/2013)
L' Eomot Inversé (7/9/2013)
Koen Verbeeck (7/9/2013)
The smiley means: "OK you got me, I should've reread my sentence and cought that mistake. But since I only check for typos - my grammer is normally better than 90% of the non-native English speakers on forums like these - I usually don't catch subtle grammar mistakes. So I instead I play the 'Hey I know nothing, I'm from Barcelona' card." All in one little smiley 😀I thought it did, but I couldn't admit that while pretending it didn't, could I? 😛
But I don't think it's a grammar mistake. I see both "in order to do maintenance" and "for maintenance" as adverb phrases (specifically adverbs of purpose) so they are grammatically the same. I think there's an issue of semantics as opposed to of grammar:
The sentence is "It was closed the week we were there for maintenance."
The way I was taught English is the prepositional phrase modifies the phrase right before it. So the words "for maintenance" modifies "we were there" as opposed to the phrase "It was closed".
This is also the way I read it as both an author and an editor. So no, it's not really symantics here so much as an interpretation of American English grammar rules. Though I do admit that British English grammar rules may be different in regards to modification of nouns, verbs, and other phrases.
What I was talking about was the difference in the implications of the two phrases "om onderhoud te doen" and "voor onderhoud", which are both adverb phrases so the difference isn't one caused by grammar. I actually agree with you about the grammar rule (and I think Koen does too, as he says that his word order could cause confusion in Dutch, which suggests the rule is the same in Dutch).
The grammar rule about proximity (could be immediately following instead of immediately preceding - think of a sentence like "On Saturday we were there, on Friday we were not") is really the same in British English and American English. But the proximity rule is not 100% reliable, partly because people are often careless about how they phrase things, and partly because it can be modified by punctuation (ie by pauses and/or stress changes in spoken English). In the sentence "It was closed the week we were there - for maintenance" with a longish pause after "there", heavy stress on "maintenance", and "for" so unstressed as to verge on being indistinct it would be pretty clear that "for maintenance" qualified "was closed", not "were there"; that's sloppy grammar, of course, whether in BR En or in US EN, probably caused by someone saying " it was closed the week when we were there" and deciding to say why it was closed too late to say that bit in the grammatically correct place. Despite being ungrammatical, when said with that pause and stress the meaning is pretty clear, in both BR EN and in US EN I think, and is in conflict with grammar. I don't get the impression that Americans are any less likely than Brits to start talking before they have completely worked out how to structure what they are going to say, I guess they could be superhumanly restrained, never open the mouth too quickly, but going by what I've heard them saying I think that's about as likely as that Brits are superhuman, which I know to be false; besides, surely after George W Bush's presidency everyone in the world knows that Americans can screw up vocabulary and grammar as thoroughly as can Brits.
Tom
July 10, 2013 at 10:15 am
L' Eomot Inversé (7/10/2013)
. . . I don't get the impression that Americans are any less likely than Brits to start talking before they have completely worked out how to structure what they are going to say, I guess they could be superhumanly restrained, never open the mouth too quickly, but going by what I've heard them saying I think that's about as likely as that Brits are superhuman, which I know to be false; . . .
That's why there is acknowledged and respected difference between spoken and written English, both UK and US.
Viewing 15 posts - 40,471 through 40,485 (of 66,638 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply