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

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

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 14 , Apr 1, 2008
      "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 2 of 14 , Apr 2, 2008
        --- 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 3 of 14 , Apr 2, 2008
          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 4 of 14 , Apr 2, 2008
            --- 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 5 of 14 , Apr 2, 2008
              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 6 of 14 , Apr 2, 2008
                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 7 of 14 , Apr 2, 2008
                  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 8 of 14 , Apr 2, 2008
                    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 9 of 14 , Apr 3, 2008
                      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.