Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Czechlist] NS (or grammarian) needed: or in negative expression

Expand Messages
  • James Kirchner
    I agree. We can t do 1 or 2, means, We can t do 1. + We can t do 2. The negative particle in can t applies to both items. This application of a
    Message 1 of 14 , Apr 1, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      I agree.

      "We can't do 1 or 2," means, "We can't do 1." + "We can't do 2." The
      negative particle in "can't" applies to both items.

      This application of a negative particle across clause boundaries
      becomes a factor in bad Czech-to-English translations, as I brought up
      on the list in days of yore.

      For example, there was a show on Czech TV called "Nevahej a toc!".
      The CTV website translated the title as "Don't hesitate and shoot!"
      which actually means, "Nevahej a netoc!" because the negative particle
      in "don't" applies to both verbs. The title should have been
      translated as something like, "Hurry up and shoot!"

      Jamie
    • melvyn.geo
      Hello Honza, ... interpretation in negative sentences. Well, that s what it says here: http://www.ling.umd.edu/cnl/lunch/goro.html E.g. Junior didn t eat the
      Message 2 of 14 , Apr 1, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Hello Honza,

        :-) Don't forget, English 'or' can yield a 'conjunctive'
        interpretation in negative sentences. Well, that's what it says here:
        http://www.ling.umd.edu/cnl/lunch/goro.html

        E.g. Junior didn't eat the carrot or the pepper = he didn't eat the
        carrot AND he didn't eat the pepper = he ate neither the carrot nor
        the pepper.

        For your 'mutually exclusive' idea to be expressed, I would look for
        an EITHER/OR construction.

        Fascinating stuff.

        M.

        --- In Czechlist@yahoogroups.com, "Jan Vaněk jr."
        <jan.vanek.jr@...> wrote:
        >
        > From a Dilbert comics:
        >
        > D: My project is on hold. Do you need any help on yours?
        > Alice: Sure. Call these customers and tell them we can't deliver
        > on time or with the features they need.
        > D: Do you have any tasks that *don't* feel like getting waterboarded
        > on your birthday?
        > A: And tell them the price went up.
        >
        > Now, does the "or" (rather) mean "neither-nor" (with the punchline
        > completing the triad), or a "one or the other" tradeoff (as I'm
        > told is the custom for IT, by definition of software development
        > which ensures at least something is always there to deliver),
        > i. e., interestingly, the same thing the sentence would mean
        > without the "not"?
        >
        > Thanks,
        >
        > --
        > Jan Vanìk jr. - http://twitter.com/jvjr - same username at Gmail
        >
        > A translation from Talpress: the guy who was writing
        > sensible-but-radical posts to various newsgroups I hung out in
        > - ten kluk, který psal chytré, ale radikální èlánky do
        > rozlièných novin, kterých jsem si vždycky všimnul ...
        >
      • James Kirchner
        I can t help you and cook dinner. = I can t do both at the same time. I can t help you or cook dinner. = I can t do either of them at all. Jamie ...
        Message 3 of 14 , Apr 1, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          "I can't help you and cook dinner."
          = I can't do both at the same time.

          "I can't help you or cook dinner."
          = I can't do either of them at all.

          Jamie

          On Apr 1, 2008, at 7:38 PM, melvyn.geo wrote:

          > Hello Honza,
          >
          > :-) Don't forget, English 'or' can yield a 'conjunctive'
          > interpretation in negative sentences. Well, that's what it says here:
          > http://www.ling.umd.edu/cnl/lunch/goro.html
          >
          > E.g. Junior didn't eat the carrot or the pepper = he didn't eat the
          > carrot AND he didn't eat the pepper = he ate neither the carrot nor
          > the pepper.
          >
          > For your 'mutually exclusive' idea to be expressed, I would look for
          > an EITHER/OR construction.
          >
          > Fascinating stuff.
          >
          > M.
          >
          > --- In Czechlist@yahoogroups.com, "Jan Vaněk jr."
          > <jan.vanek.jr@...> wrote:
          > >
          > > From a Dilbert comics:
          > >
          > > D: My project is on hold. Do you need any help on yours?
          > > Alice: Sure. Call these customers and tell them we can't deliver
          > > on time or with the features they need.
          > > D: Do you have any tasks that *don't* feel like getting waterboarded
          > > on your birthday?
          > > A: And tell them the price went up.
          > >
          > > Now, does the "or" (rather) mean "neither-nor" (with the punchline
          > > completing the triad), or a "one or the other" tradeoff (as I'm
          > > told is the custom for IT, by definition of software development
          > > which ensures at least something is always there to deliver),
          > > i. e., interestingly, the same thing the sentence would mean
          > > without the "not"?
          > >
          > > Thanks,
          > >
          > > --
          > > Jan Van�k jr. - http://twitter.com/jvjr - same username at Gmail
          > >
          > > A translation from Talpress: the guy who was writing
          > > sensible-but-radical posts to various newsgroups I hung out in
          > > - ten kluk, kter� psal chytr�, ale radik�ln� �l�nky do
          > > rozli�n�ch novin, kter�ch jsem si v�dycky v�imnul ...
          > >
          >
          >
          >



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Jan Vaněk jr.
          ... My maths training never lets me forget that a negation of disjunction is a conjunction of negations, and I tried to argue so in the debate that brought me
          Message 4 of 14 , Apr 2, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In Czechlist@yahoogroups.com, "melvyn.geo" <zehrovak@...> wrote:

            > :-) Don't forget, English 'or' can yield a 'conjunctive'
            > interpretation in negative sentences. Well, that's what it says here:
            > http://www.ling.umd.edu/cnl/lunch/goro.html

            My maths training never lets me forget that a negation of disjunction
            is a conjunction of negations, and I tried to argue so in the debate
            that brought me here for the ultimate (read: perhaps more inclined
            to my point the previous ones ;-) authority, but it isn't always
            so easy in natural languages - or at the very least, I was thinking
            too much in Czech, which is apparently closer to Japanese than to
            English.

            Might this be another vestige of, IIRC/ISTR, the influence of
            mathematics during the 17th (or 18th?) century that was purportedly
            the main reason for prescribing the double negative out of English?

            Thanks to all who replied!

            --
            Jan Vanek jr.
          • Gerald Turner
            Dear Jan, Changing the subject: could I suggest that you replace the e s hackem with a plain e in your email address? Gerry ... -- Czech-In Translations V
            Message 5 of 14 , Apr 2, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              Dear Jan,

              Changing the subject: could I suggest that you replace the "e s hackem"
              with a plain "e" in your email address?

              Gerry

              On 02/04/2008, Jan Vaněk jr. <jan.vanek.jr@...> wrote:
              >
              > --- In Czechlist@yahoogroups.com <Czechlist%40yahoogroups.com>,
              > "melvyn.geo" <zehrovak@...> wrote:
              >
              > > :-) Don't forget, English 'or' can yield a 'conjunctive'
              > > interpretation in negative sentences. Well, that's what it says here:
              > > http://www.ling.umd.edu/cnl/lunch/goro.html
              >
              > My maths training never lets me forget that a negation of disjunction
              > is a conjunction of negations, and I tried to argue so in the debate
              > that brought me here for the ultimate (read: perhaps more inclined
              > to my point the previous ones ;-) authority, but it isn't always
              > so easy in natural languages - or at the very least, I was thinking
              > too much in Czech, which is apparently closer to Japanese than to
              > English.
              >
              > Might this be another vestige of, IIRC/ISTR, the influence of
              > mathematics during the 17th (or 18th?) century that was purportedly
              > the main reason for prescribing the double negative out of English?
              >
              > Thanks to all who replied!
              >
              > --
              > Jan Vanek jr.
              >
              >
              >



              --
              Czech-In Translations
              V lesíčku 5
              150 00 Prague 5
              Czech Republic
              Tel/fax: ++ 420 235 357 194

              To see a World in a Grain of Sand
              And a Heaven in a Wild Flower,
              Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand
              And Eternity in an hour.


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • melvyn.geo
              ... I can t help you and cook dinner. = I can t do both at the same time. Hmmm OK, I feel AND could well be marked for expressiveness here and might often be
              Message 6 of 14 , Apr 2, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In Czechlist@yahoogroups.com, James Kirchner <jpklists@...> wrote:
                "I can't help you and cook dinner."
                = I can't do both at the same time.

                Hmmm OK, I feel AND could well be marked for expressiveness here and
                might often be uttered with emphasis, if it is in the sense of "I
                can't help you with your homework AND cook your dinner" = "I don't
                have two ***** pairs of hands, you know!"

                However, the situation is surely complicated by the possibility of
                hendiadys: "I can't help you and cook dinner" = "I can't help you to
                cook dinner" or "I can't help you by cooking the dinner" on the same
                model as: Don't try and help him = don't try to help him.

                Going off on this tangent for a moment, Jarmila Tarnyiková deals with
                this hendiadys issue in her excellent Sentence Complexes in Text.
                Other (positive) examples she takes from the British National Corpus:
                Be sure and get paid for everything = Be sure to get paid for everything.
                Could I start and remind delegates... = Could I start by reminding
                delegates...
                Be an angel and shut up = Mlc s drzkou anebo dostanes (OK no hits on
                Google for this, but I swear that's what I've heard in Kladno :-O, but
                I digress).

                "Hendiadys presents a formidable problem for the analyst as well as
                for ESL acquisition. The problem of how to distinguish between two
                separate predications and hendiadys is also of relevance to the
                processes of translating and interpreting." (p. 112 ibid)

                "I can't help you or cook dinner."
                = I can't do either of them at all.

                This strikes me as being the more common unmarked form in a negative
                sentence.

                BR

                M.
              • James Kirchner
                ... Yes, that s very probable, although I have no idea what IIRC/ISTR means. The grammarians of the 17th and 18th century forced a lot of rules on English
                Message 7 of 14 , Apr 2, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  On Apr 2, 2008, at 7:14 AM, Jan Vaněk jr. wrote:

                  > Might this be another vestige of, IIRC/ISTR, the influence of
                  > mathematics during the 17th (or 18th?) century that was purportedly
                  > the main reason for prescribing the double negative out of English?

                  Yes, that's very probable, although I have no idea what "IIRC/ISTR"
                  means.

                  The grammarians of the 17th and 18th century forced a lot of rules on
                  English that were very unnatural to the language, based on their
                  assumption that Latin was more perfect and more rational. However,
                  when they didn't like some characteristic of English that was similar
                  to one in Latin -- such as double negatives -- they ignored Latin and
                  used math as their rationale.

                  Jamie



                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Veselý Petr
                  Hello everybody, I would appreciate help with the explanation of the above terms in the context of Company Register Information. The document says : Last
                  Message 8 of 14 , Apr 2, 2008
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hello everybody,

                    I would appreciate help with the explanation of the above terms in the context of Company Register Information.

                    The document says :

                    Last accounts made up to: 24/01/2000
                    Next accounts due
                    Last return made up to
                    Next return due

                    Accounts of XYZ company made up to
                    Return made up to 24/01/2007

                    Does "return" mean simply "zisk"? What do they mean by "accounts" - ucetni vykazy, zakaznici, ucty, something else?

                    TIA
                    Petr



                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Matej Klimes
                    posledni ucetni uzaverka a posledni danove priznani (podano) atd... M ... From: Veselý Petr To: Czechlist@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 8:22
                    Message 9 of 14 , Apr 2, 2008
                    • 0 Attachment
                      posledni ucetni uzaverka a posledni danove priznani (podano) atd...

                      M

                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: Veselý Petr
                      To: Czechlist@yahoogroups.com
                      Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 8:22 AM
                      Subject: [Czechlist] "Accounts" and "Return" in Company Register Information


                      Hello everybody,

                      I would appreciate help with the explanation of the above terms in the context of Company Register Information.

                      The document says :

                      Last accounts made up to: 24/01/2000
                      Next accounts due
                      Last return made up to
                      Next return due

                      Accounts of XYZ company made up to
                      Return made up to 24/01/2007

                      Does "return" mean simply "zisk"? What do they mean by "accounts" - ucetni vykazy, zakaznici, ucty, something else?

                      TIA
                      Petr

                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Martin Janda
                      Presne tak. Martin
                      Message 10 of 14 , Apr 2, 2008
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Presne tak.
                        Martin

                        Matej Klimes napsal(a):
                        >
                        >
                        > posledni ucetni uzaverka a posledni danove priznani (podano) atd...
                        >
                        > M
                        >
                        > ----- Original Message -----
                        > From: Veselý Petr
                        > To: Czechlist@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Czechlist%40yahoogroups.com>
                        > Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 8:22 AM
                        > Subject: [Czechlist] "Accounts" and "Return" in Company Register Information
                        >
                        > Hello everybody,
                        >
                        > I would appreciate help with the explanation of the above terms in the
                        > context of Company Register Information.
                        >
                        > The document says :
                        >
                        > Last accounts made up to: 24/01/2000
                        > Next accounts due
                        > Last return made up to
                        > Next return due
                        >
                        > Accounts of XYZ company made up to
                        > Return made up to 24/01/2007
                        >
                        > Does "return" mean simply "zisk"? What do they mean by "accounts" -
                        > ucetni vykazy, zakaznici, ucty, something else?
                        >
                        > TIA
                        > Petr
                      • Veselý Petr
                        Diky, chlapi, není tam kontext a ja mam ted obdobi, kdy mi to moc nepali, tak jste mi vytrhli trn z paty. Petr ... From: Martin Janda To:
                        Message 11 of 14 , Apr 3, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Diky, chlapi,

                          není tam kontext a ja mam ted obdobi, kdy mi to moc nepali, tak jste mi vytrhli trn z paty.

                          Petr

                          ----- Original Message -----
                          From: Martin Janda
                          To: Czechlist@yahoogroups.com
                          Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 8:53 AM
                          Subject: Re: [Czechlist] "Accounts" and "Return" in Company Register Information


                          Presne tak.
                          Martin

                          Matej Klimes napsal(a):
                          >
                          >
                          > posledni ucetni uzaverka a posledni danove priznani (podano) atd...
                          >
                          > M
                          >
                          > ----- Original Message -----
                          > From: Veselý Petr
                          > To: Czechlist@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Czechlist%40yahoogroups.com>
                          > Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2008 8:22 AM
                          > Subject: [Czechlist] "Accounts" and "Return" in Company Register Information
                          >
                          > Hello everybody,
                          >
                          > I would appreciate help with the explanation of the above terms in the
                          > context of Company Register Information.
                          >
                          > The document says :
                          >
                          > Last accounts made up to: 24/01/2000
                          > Next accounts due
                          > Last return made up to
                          > Next return due
                          >
                          > Accounts of XYZ company made up to
                          > Return made up to 24/01/2007
                          >
                          > Does "return" mean simply "zisk"? What do they mean by "accounts" -
                          > ucetni vykazy, zakaznici, ucty, something else?
                          >
                          > TIA
                          > Petr




                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.