Important notice from the GRAMMAR POLICE. Plz read. This means you.
rufio:
Quote from: Roflganger on 2009 July 24, 07:20:29
Indeed. "Funny you may think it" parses to me as "Funny, you might think so but..." more than the apparently intended "You might think it's funny, but..." I'm not saying that was the source of Rohina's confusion, but it certainly caused some for me.
I actually interpreted it as "Funny as you may think it..." which makes perfect sense.
Quote from: rohina on 2009 July 24, 07:41:20
People who start sentences with "This being" tend to be lost causes anyway, because even if you can teach them to express themselves grammatically, the whole "this being" construction tends to be a marker for "causality, it is not for me".
If you are trying to argue that it's illogical to put the cause clause first, I feel obligated to point out that for some languages that is the preferred order.
Midwing:
Quote from: Roflganger on 2009 July 24, 07:20:29
"Funny you may think it" parses to me as "Funny, you might think so but..." more than the apparently intended "You might think it's funny, but..."
I see how ambiguous that was now, I understand the confusion. I will paraphrase more clearly.
Quote from: rufio on 2009 July 24, 14:59:23
If you are trying to argue that it's illogical to put the cause clause first, I feel obligated to point out that for some languages that is the preferred order.
Perhaps because it is a phrase I'm so used to hearing on a daily basis, I'm not entirely sure how it is wrong. I'm sure it will be pointed out to be in meticulous detail, however.
rufio:
Quote from: Midwing on 2009 July 24, 16:04:57
Quote from: rufio on 2009 July 24, 14:59:23
If you are trying to argue that it's illogical to put the cause clause first, I feel obligated to point out that for some languages that is the preferred order.
Perhaps because it is a phrase I'm so used to hearing on a daily basis, I'm not entirely sure how it is wrong. I'm sure it will be pointed out to be in meticulous detail, however.
It's simple: It is not part of rohina's dialect, and is thus ABOMINATION.
CheritaChen:
Quote from: rufio on 2009 July 24, 14:59:23
If you are trying to argue that it's illogical to put the cause clause first, I feel obligated to point out that for some languages that is the preferred order.
Now I feel obligated to point out that we are not communicating in some languages on this forum. We all, including Midwing, are using English.
Besides that, my objection to such a construction would not be so much in the order as the clunky tense of the sentence. There is a distinction between
Quote from: jolrei on 2009 July 24, 13:25:52
This being the case, perhaps I should repent me of my wrongdoing, although I really think I use the construct correctly.
and
Quote from: Midwing on 2009 July 24, 00:18:16
This being the reason for asking in the first place. It's never too late to learn.
jolrei used a separate clause that, while not a great sentence unto itself, did not obfuscate any of the requisite elements of subject (I), verb (should repent) and object (wrongdoing) which were all clearly rendered by the sentence. Midwing used a construction that unnecessarily garbled the flow of information and made something passive (either this or reason, it's not easy to distinguish) which shouldn't have been (being vs. is).
Midwing:
So, "That was my reason for asking" instead? "This is why I asked"? "It is because of this I asked"? "I asked because of this?"
Am I any closer?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page