 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / May 2009"Half an hour later, and the night was quite dark."
Ladies and Gentlemen: ------------------------ Half an hour later, and the night was quite dark. [Alexandre Dumas (2008). The count of Monte Cristo (David Coward revised). Oxford University Press (Original work published 1844)] ------------------------ Someone doubts the use of "and" in the quoted sentence is correct, and thinks that "and" should be omitted, that is, "Half an hour later, the night was quite dark." It is another sentence that we have discussed about. The other sentence is, however, of unknown source, so I found in a published work an example whose sentence structure is very much the same. Please shed some light on the use of that "and." Best Wishes, Tacia > ------------------------ > Half an hour later, and the night was quite dark. > [Alexandre Dumas (2008). The count of Monte Cristo (David Coward > revised). > Oxford University Press (Original work published 1844)] > ------------------------ > Someone doubts the use of "and" in the quoted sentence is correct, > and thinks that "and" should be omitted, that is, "Half an hour > later, the night was quite dark." > It is another sentence that we have discussed about. The other > sentence is, however, of unknown source, so I found in a published > work an example whose sentence structure is very much the same. > Please shed some light on the use of that "and." The text you quote is a translation, and there may be something in the original that has influenced the translator to choose this construction. Looking at the English only, I would say that the first phrase is really a clause, with some words missing which must be supplied by the reader: "[It was] half an hour later". The effect, for me, is that of personal narrative, keeping the author present in the reader's mind as he tells the story. Hi, what follows are other sentences of such construction: 1. A month later and things were no better. [Simon Wincheste (1998). The professor and the madman. HarperCollins.] 2. A week later, and she might have been pregnant. [Susan Kay Law (2008). The paper marriage. Penguin Group USA.] 3. An hour later and they came to a crossroads. [Cormac McCarthy (1994). The crossing. A.A. Knopf.] 4. A day later, and Lynn Pierce remained among the missing[.] [Max Allan Collins & Mike Flaherty (2002). Sin city. Pocket Books.] 5. A day later and no serous fluid at all escapes from the cut surface. [Edward Samuel Farrow (1920). Gas warfare. E.P. Dutton & company.] 6. A very few hours later, and he would have died in this assembly. [Austin Brereton (2008). The literary history of the Adelphi and its neighbourhood. Read Books.] --------- Might it be that they are influenced by colloquialism? Best Wishes, Tacia > Hi, what follows are other sentences of such construction: > 1. A month later and things were no better. > [Simon Wincheste (1998). The professor and the madman. > HarperCollins.] > 2. A week later, and she might have been pregnant. > [Susan Kay Law (2008). The paper marriage. Penguin Group USA.] > 3. An hour later and they came to a crossroads. > [Cormac McCarthy (1994). The crossing. A.A. Knopf.] > 4. A day later, and Lynn Pierce remained among the missing[.] > [Max Allan Collins & Mike Flaherty (2002). Sin city. Pocket > Books.] > 5. A day later and no serous fluid at all escapes from the cut > surface. > [Edward Samuel Farrow (1920). Gas warfare. E.P. Dutton & > company.] > 6. A very few hours later, and he would have died in this assembly. > [Austin Brereton (2008). The literary history of the Adelphi and > its neighbourhood. Read Books.] > --------- > Might it be that they are influenced by colloquialism? I agree that the sentences are not written in the most formal English. In each case, there are words to be supplied to make the introductory phrase into the clause it really is. In four of the sentences, the words are the same as in your first example: "it was..." (actually, in number 5, "it is", since the account appears to be given in the present tense). In numbers 2 and 6, because the verbs in the second clause express possibility and not actuality, the meaning of the first clause is conditional, and the words to be supplied are not as obvious, because conditional sentences don't usually have "and" at the beginning their "then"-clause*. You might think of those sentences as "2. [It might have happened] a week later, and she might [because of that] have been pregnant," and 6. "[It might have happened] a very few hours later, and [then] he would have died in this assembly." In both cases, the meaning is "if A, then B", but the simple form won't work when the second clause begins with "and". Of course, for comprehension, you can simply drop that word: "2. If it had happened a week later, she might have been pregnant." In the words supplied, "it...happened" must stand for some event that the reader will know about from previous context. __________ *I hope that is clear. I have avoided the technical terms I learned when young, because I am almost certain they are not the ones that teachers use nowadays. >> ------------------------ >> Half an hour later, and the night was quite dark. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > original that has influenced the translator to choose this > construction. What Dumas wrote was "Une demi-heure après, il faisait nuit noire", which doesn't shed much light on why the translator inserted the "and". I'm inclined to agree with the people who think it should have been omitted. Moreover, in terms of modern colloquial English "the night was quite dark" seems rather too weak for "il faisait nuit noire". I would have been more likely to put "completely dark" or something equivalent -- even the literal "black". In terms of the dictionary meaning of "quite" as "completely" "quite" is OK, but as nearly everyone now uses it just to mean "somewhat", it doesn't reflect Dumas's sense at all well. > Looking at the English only, I would say that the first > phrase is really a clause, with some words missing which must be > supplied by the reader: "[It was] half an hour later". The effect, > for me, is that of personal narrative, keeping the author present in > the reader's mind as he tells the story.  Signatureathel >Moreover, in terms of modern colloquial English "the night was quite >dark" seems rather too weak for "il faisait nuit noire". I would have >been more likely to put "completely dark" or something equivalent -- >even the literal "black". In terms of the dictionary meaning of "quite" >as "completely" "quite" is OK, but as nearly everyone now uses it just >to mean "somewhat", That might be "nearly everyone except AmE-speakers". http://www.bartleby.com/68/32/4932.html Kenneth G. Wilson (1923). The Columbia Guide to Standard American English. 1993. quite (adv., intensifier) has developed three Standard clusters of meaning, not always distinctly different. It functions as an intensifier meaning wholly, completely, as in Im quite pleased with my new shoes and Hes quite mad, you know. In BrE "Im quite pleased with my new shoes" would mean "Im moderately/fairly/somewhat pleased with my new shoes". As a similar intensifier it means more than, positively, as in She was quite beside herself with joy; in this use it frequently modifies an absolute adjective, as in _The town was quite leveled by the tornado_. As a qualifier it can also reduce the strength of the adjective and means rather, a bit, as in Its getting quite cold in here and Im quite tired tonight. .... > it doesn't reflect Dumas's sense at all well. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>Moreover, in terms of modern colloquial English "the night was quite >>dark" seems rather too weak for "il faisait nuit noire". I would [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > That might be "nearly everyone except AmE-speakers". But AmE speakers represent only about two-thirds of the native speakers, so they can be safely ignored. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |On a scale of one to ten... 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |it sucked. Palo Alto, CA 94304 kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >>> Moreover, in terms of modern colloquial English "the night was quite >>> dark" seems rather too weak for "il faisait nuit noire". I would [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > But AmE speakers represent only about two-thirds of the native > speakers, so they can be safely ignored. Indeed. Just like elections, innit. SignatureRay UK On May 22, 10:09 am, Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >> ------------------------ > >> Half an hour later, and the night was quite dark. [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > as "completely" "quite" is OK, but as nearly everyone now uses it just > to mean "somewhat", it doesn't reflect Dumas's sense at all well. "Half an hour later, it was black night," would work for me. -- Jerry Friedman In message <88b9c249-8c3b-483e-b3eb-61a79465ee12@m39g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>, Jerry Friedman <jerry_friedman@yahoo.com> writes >On May 22, 10:09 am, Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel...@yahoo.co.uk> >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > >"Half an hour later, it was black night," would work for me. Really REALLY dark is "pitch black". "Half an hour later, (and) the night was pitch black." "Half an hour later, it was pitch black night." SignatureIan > ------------------------ > Half an hour later, and the night was quite dark. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > thinks that "and" should be omitted, that is, "Half an hour later, the > night was quite dark." This is a stylistic choice of the translator, for rhetorical effect. Picture to yourself someone reading this book aloud to an audience. (This used to be common in some workplaces, famously tailors' workshops in London and cigar-makers' in New York. Supposedly, long-time workers in these places heard so many classic books read aloud that they were thus thoroughly educated.) SignatureDon Phillipson Carlsbad Springs (Ottawa, Canada) > Ladies and Gentlemen: > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Please shed some light on the use of that "and." Out of context, I'd take it as elliptical for something like It was now half an hour later, and the night was quite dark. Looking at context, though, that's the end of the description of a sunset. I see it in one translation as "half an hour after, the night was quite dark". I'd probably lose the "and", but it doesn't sound terribly wrong or even unidiomatic. SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |The plural of "anecdote" 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |is not "data" Palo Alto, CA 94304 kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.