Help with English

Discussion in 'Linguistics' started by Saint, Aug 24, 2011.

  1. Cyrus the Great Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    185
    Thank you so much. I can only and only say that your explanation and knowledge is FANTABULOUS and PRICELESS.
    And, I should say that because you are a linguist, so only some persons like you can answer me too exactly.





    And, my last questions about this issue:

    Would you possibly in a way help me so that I can understand and distinguish between the following or such constructions?
    Primarily, I usually have some problems with such a structure__ being adjective or a NP( noun phrase), et cetera.
    In a sate of being ill

    to be ill
    .................................


    Stones are to be schlepped.

    Stones are to schlepped.


    Or,

    They are to be married.

    They are to marry.

    Or,


    It is to be eaten.

    It is to eaten.





    Could you help me in a way that I can understand the difference between them?

    ,,,,,,,,,,,,

    I hope that I can say my questions well, if not, please ask me to elaborate them.

    Thanks in advance
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    I'm not really a linguist. I'm a software engineer, although for the last 15 years I've made a living as a writer and editor. But I've been studying languages and linguistics for more than 50 years.

    "In a state of being ill" is too complicated. "In a state of illness" would be okay--but it's more likely to be used metaphorically than literally:

    "The U.S. government is in a state of illness. It has not been able to do anything important correctly for more than a year."

    But: "John is ill" is best. However, in America we almost always say "sick" instead of "ill."

    You've gotten the grammar wrong in the second sentence: "are to [past participle]" is not allowable. You have to say "are to be [past participle]."

    But your first sentence, while grammatically correct, is still wrong in an important way. The phrase "to be [past participle]" is very formal. We don't use it in casual speech. But the word "schlep" is slang, and is only used in casual speech, especially in a joke or a funny anecdote.

    You should never use them together!

    This is grammatically correct. However, you should not use these extremely formal expressions in speech, or even in casual writing. Just say, "They are going to get married." In American dialect, unless we're speaking slowly and formally, we combine "they" and "are" into the contraction "they're." Furthermore, "going to" is elided into "gonna," which is pure slang. So it comes out "They're gonna get married."

    It is permissible to write "they're," but never "gonna"--except in a story where you're carefully transcribing informal dialog. Just like "ain't" or "snuck" or "me and him are going to the movies" or "I dove into the water."

    This makes it sound like someone has ordered them to get married, perhaps because the bride is six months pregnant.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    I don't think you'll ever read or hear this construction in American English.

    Once again, the second construction is always incorrect. A past participle has to be preceded by some form of the verb "be." It is to be eaten, it is eaten, it was eaten, it will be eaten, it has been eaten, it is going to be eaten, it is being eaten, it was not eaten, etc.

    To be eaten is the most painful way to die.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    Schlepped is not a word I am familiar with in the UK.
    I recognise that it is of Jewish origin, and the first part of it "Schlep" means an idiot I think.
    I haven't ever seen it written as a verb though.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Cyrus the Great Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    185
    Thank you all so much.
     
  8. Cyrus the Great Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    185
    Subjunctive

    It was his order that all forests be protected.

    His order was that all forests be protected.


    That all forests be protected was his order.


    Would anyone know whether these are right and the same?

    In addition, could you kindly elaborate your explanations?

    Many thanks
     
  9. Cyrus the Great Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    185
    clause

    The most self-interested thing I can do is be unselfish.


    The most self-interested thing I can do is being unselfish.


    The most self-interested thing I can do is to be unselfish.


    Would anyone readily and kindly explain me in elaborate the difference between these?
    And, which one do you use? and which one have you seen in books et cetera?


    Many thanks
     
  10. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    You've asked this same question before. In writing and formal speech, "to be unselfish" is correct. In casual speech, "be unselfish" is common. "Being unselfish" is never correct.
     
  11. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    These are both correct. There's no reason to choose one over the other; they are equivalent. You might choose one over the other based on what came before it:

    "What was his order? I didn't hear the announcement."
    "His order was that all forests be protected."

    "My bus was late so I missed the speech. Did the King say anything about protecting the forests?"
    "Yes. In fact, it was his order that all forests be protected."

    This is grammatically correct, but no one speaks that way, or even writes that way. The syntax is too complicated. You might see it in a book written 200 years ago.
     
  12. Cyrus the Great Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    185
    technological operation

    Directives affecting such factors may vary from administrative regulation of private activity to government ownership of a technological operation.


    Would you kindly explain me the following?

    Administrative regulation of private activity to government ownership of a technological operation.

    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,


    Moreover, do the following part belong to both parts, administrative regulation of private activity and government ownership ?






    Source:

    http://www.urch.com/forums/gre-reading-comprehension/54490-boring-passage.html



    Thanks in advance
     
  13. Cyrus the Great Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    185
    Thank you so much.
     
  14. Cyrus the Great Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    185
    I am so sorry. I made a mistak.

    Thank you so much.
     
  15. Cyrus the Great Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    185
    technological and technology

    Greetings



    Could you possibly explain the following in details? I am more confused with the difference between these terms, technological and technology.






    Technological activity

    Telecommunications technology is developing fast.


    Many thanks
     
  16. Cyrus the Great Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    185
    corporate boards & customer action

    Such alterations include the addition of public-interest members to corporate boards, the imposition by statute of duties on governmental decision-makers, and the extension of warranties in response to customer action.

    Would anyone please give me some example so that I can understand this issue?

    ,,,,,...,,,................
    Source:
    www.urch.com/forums/gre-reading-com...ading-comprehension/54490-boring-passage.html


    Thanks in advance
     
  17. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,451
    No. Go and take an English course for God's sake. This is a science forum, not a free translation service for lazy people.
     
  18. Cyrus the Great Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    185
    Would anyone please help me?

    Thanks
     
  19. Olinguito Registered Member

    Messages:
    73
    “Technological” is an adjective, “technology” is a noun.
     
  20. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    The USA has a larger Jewish population. Although antisemitism exists even here, Jewish people have been treated more kindly in the USA than anywhere else--except several hundred years ago in China.

    A disproportionate number of Jewish Americans have been entertainers, including comedians, so they introduced many Yiddish words into American English. The phonetics of the Yiddish language automatically sound funny to speakers of English. Many words begin with shl-, shm-, shn-, shp-, sht-, shv-, etc. No native English words begin this way. We usually write it as schl- instead of shl, etc., because that way it even looks funny in writing.

    Schlep: transitive verb (past tense schlepped, gerund schlepping)
    to carry, to lug, as in "to schlep an umbrella on a sunny day."

    Schlep: intransitive verb
    to move slowly, awkwardly, or tediously, as in "We schlepped from store to store all day."

    Schlep or schlepper: noun
    someone or something that is tedious, slow, or awkward; a drag on the energy of a person, group or organization.

    Origin: 1920–25; < Yiddish shlepn, (transitive) to pull or drag, (intransitive) to trudge

    < Middle High German dialect sleppen < Middle Low German, Middle Dutch slēpen; cognate with Middle High German, Old High German sleifen (compare modern German schleifen); akin to English "slip," "slippery"

    It is most commonly used as a verb. And it is most commonly used in speech, since it is slang. It is unusual to see it in writing at all!
     
  21. Cyrus the Great Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    185
    too vs. as well

    I am a drummer too

    I am a drummer as well


    Who knows the exact difference between these?
     
  22. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    There is no real difference. "As well" is more formal and is more likely to be used in writing.

    Cyrus: Please post your questions in the proper thread: "Help with English." You don't need to start a new discussion every time you have a question.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Thanks--F.R.
     
  23. Saint Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,752
    Why call it "hot potato"?
    Hot carrot, hot barbecue etc?
     

Share This Page