 |
 | 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 / February 2010re: anybody else
re: anybody else "Right now? Maybe thirteen, depending on whether anybody else's checked out. (The Last Precinct,P Cornwell ) context: Motel's owner is asked by a dectective how many stay in right now. question: about "anybody else" The owner said thirteen, then "anybody else" is outside the thirteen or inside the thirteen? From context anybody else must be a part of the thirtenn. But if one tries to get what's meant by it literally, it would be perplexing. Because anybody else could be taken as any people outside the thirteen. So, it should have said: depending on whether anyone of them has checked out. What do you think? In message <aaca1561-fe1d-4ad2-8133-b37c41a0a402@f17g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, Masa <autosu@infoseek.jp> writes >re: anybody else > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > >What do you think? You really can't tell how accurate "thirteen" is. Even without the "maybe", it's essentially an estimate. You don't know what it would have been without "anybody else" being there to check out. It could be more - or less than thirteen - or even thirteen itself.  SignatureIan > "Right now? Maybe thirteen, depending on whether anybody else's checked > out. Absent context, that "else" would appear to be a back-reference to someone--not included in the thirteen--who had already checked out. The speaker appears to be saying that after that checkout, the most recent *known* to him, thirteen persons remain in residence, but that it is possible that some of them have also checked out outside his ken. SignatureCordially, Eric Walker, Owlcroft House http://owlcroft.com/english/ Please don't begin the subject line with "Re:" when starting a new thread; on Usenet that's supposed to indicate a followup. "Masa": > "Right now? Maybe thirteen, depending on whether anybody else's > checked out. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > The owner said thirteen, then "anybody else" is outside the thirteen > or inside the thirteen? I'm not sure what you mean by "inside" or "outside", because the "thirteen" is only correct if there isn't "anybody else". "Anybody else" here means "anybody besides the people I know about who have checked out". For example, it might be that there were 20 people and the owner knows that 7 have checked out, but it could be more than 7. If there isn't anybody else beside the 7 that he/she knows about, then 13 are still staying there. It could also be that 2 others have checked out, and now there are 11. But, anyway, all this is approximate, because of the "maybe". SignatureMark Brader | "But [he] had already established his own reputation Toronto | as someone who wrote poetry that mentioned the el." msb@vex.net | --Al Kriman My text in this article is in the public domain. >Please don't begin the subject line with "Re:" when starting a new >thread; on Usenet that's supposed to indicate a followup. I was castigated by Murray Arnow for "sabotaging" the newsgroup becaue I had failed to use Re: when starting a new thread -- damned if you do and damned if you don't. SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk Mark Brader: >> Please don't begin the subject line with "Re:" when starting a new >> thread; on Usenet that's supposed to indicate a followup. Steve Hayes: > I was castigated by Murray Arnow for "sabotaging" the newsgroup becaue > I had failed to use Re: when starting a new thread -- damned if you do > and damned if you don't. Either Murray was confused or misleading, or you are not correctly describing what went on. SignatureMark Brader "[This computation] assumed that everything Toronto would work, a happy state of affairs found msb@vex.net only in fiction." -- Tom Clancy > Mark Brader: >>> Please don't begin the subject line with "Re:" when starting a new [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Either Murray was confused or misleading, or you are not correctly > describing what went on. I could be mistaken, but I think that Steve started what he called "a new thread" by replying to a message, but omitting the "re:". SignatureSkitt (AmE) >> Mark Brader: >>>> Please don't begin the subject line with "Re:" when starting a new [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I could be mistaken, but I think that Steve started what he called "a > new thread" by replying to a message, but omitting the "re:". Or, as I recall it, changing the Subject line but omitting the "(Was re: ...)" Still, it seems that there are some people who don't know what "re" means. I have one friend who starts _every_ e-mail Subject line with "Re:". She seems to have gained the impression that that's a convention that must be followed when composing e-mail. SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. >>> Mark Brader: >>>>> Please don't begin the subject line with "Re:" when starting a new [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > "Re:". She seems to have gained the impression that that's a > convention that must be followed when composing e-mail. I think that comes from snail-mail business letters, where a "Re:" line is fairly common, right after the address block. It stands for "Regarding", of course. (Don't you wish Mark Brader would mark previously quoted material the same way as the rest of AUE contributors do?) SignatureSkitt (AmE) >>>> Mark Brader: >>>>>> Please don't begin the subject line with "Re:" when starting a new [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >fairly common, right after the address block. It stands for "Regarding", of >course. In e-mail and Usenet it stands for "Reply". Elsewhere it;s the Latin for "Matter, thing, case" and is used in a legal context to refer to cases. Re Beaglehole, for example, is an im[portant case that influenced the South African law concerning missing persons. SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk > Elsewhere it;s the Latin for "Matter, thing, case" and is used in a > legal context to refer to cases. > > Re Beaglehole, for example, is an im[portant case that influenced > the South African law concerning missing persons. In the US, such a case would be "In re Beaglehole". SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Now and then an innocent man is sent 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |to the legislature. Palo Alto, CA 94304 | Kim Hubbard kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >> Elsewhere it;s the Latin for "Matter, thing, case" and is used in a >> legal context to refer to cases. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >In the US, such a case would be "In re Beaglehole". Here too, if you're using it in a sentence, instead of as a heading "In RE BEAGLEHOLE, Mr Justice Galgut argues that...." SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk >>> Elsewhere it;s the Latin for "Matter, thing, case" and is used in >>> a legal context to refer to cases. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Here too, if you're using it in a sentence, instead of as a heading > "In RE BEAGLEHOLE, Mr Justice Galgut argues that...." I detect some crossed wires. You're using the English word "in", and Evan is using the Latin word "in". SignaturePeter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org For an e-mail address, see my web page. >>>> Elsewhere it;s the Latin for "Matter, thing, case" and is used in >>>> a legal context to refer to cases. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >I detect some crossed wires. You're using the English word "in", and >Evan is using the Latin word "in". Yes. I think the sentence could stand another "in". "In In RE BEAGLEHOLE, Mr Justice Galgut argues that...." where "In RE BEAGLEHOLE" is the name of the case. "In the case In RE BEAGLEHOLE, Mr Justice Galgut argues that...." SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>>>> Elsewhere it;s the Latin for "Matter, thing, case" and is used in >>>>> a legal context to refer to cases. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > "In the case In RE BEAGLEHOLE, Mr Justice Galgut argues that...." What I hadn't realized, but seems to be consistent in Google results, is that the capitalization is "In re", with a lower-case "r". So that would be "In the case In re Beaglehole, ...". For the actual South African Case, I see re BEAGLEHOLE RE BEAGLEHOLE RE: BEAGLEHOLE Re: Beaglehole RE: Beaglehole SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |This gubblick contains many 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |nonsklarkish English flutzpahs, but Palo Alto, CA 94304 |the overall pluggandisp can be |glorked from context. kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com | (650)857-7572 | David Moser http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ >>> Mark Brader: >>>>> Please don't begin the subject line with "Re:" when starting a new [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >Or, as I recall it, changing the Subject line but omitting the "(Was re: >...)" That's right, because if I included the (was...) someone else would be bound to omit it, which my reader would then treat as a new thread, so then there would be two threads on the same topic, one with the [was and the other without it. SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk Mark Brader: >>>>>> Please don't begin the subject line with "Re:" when starting a new >>>>>> thread; on Usenet that's supposed to indicate a followup. Steve Hayes: > That's right, because if I included the (was...) someone else would be bound > to omit it, which my reader would then treat as a new thread, so then there > would be two threads on the same topic, one with the [was and the other > without it. But, you see, no matter what your reader shows, threads have to do only with References lines and not Subject lines. Hence your confusion. SignatureMark Brader, Toronto | "Anyone who can handle a needle convincingly can make msb@vex.net | us see a thread which is not there." --E.H. Gombrich >Mark Brader: >>> Please don't begin the subject line with "Re:" when starting a new [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Either Murray was confused or misleading, or you are not correctly >describing what went on. A failure in communication somewhere, perhaps. But I no longer change subject lines when the topic drifts. I know that used to annoy Bob Cunningham, but you can't please everyone and he's no longer around. SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/stevesig.htm Blog: http://methodius.blogspot.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk |
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.