 |
 | 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 / British English / June 2004"If you are a tall man, like I am, ..." -- facially nonsensical
A while ago, I found myself uttering to someone the following sentence, and feeling a little confused while saying it. "If you are a tall man, like I am, ..." (you find yourself searching for clothes that fit.) (I struggle to find clothes that fit.) (it's hard to find clothes off the rack.) ____(I said this to a woman!)____ (You'd understand my confusion if you actually say it to someone who's not a tall man.) _____________________________ Are there similar utterances in other European languages? German, French, Spanish, etc. > A while ago, I found myself uttering to someone > the following sentence, and feeling a little confused [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > German, French, Spanish, etc. The English for that would be "If you're a tall man like me, ..."  SignaturePeter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net >> A while ago, I found myself uttering to someone >> the following sentence, and feeling a little confused [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > The English for that would be "If you're a tall man like me, ..." Or "If you are a tall man, as I am, ..." SignatureJohn Briggs > >> A while ago, I found myself uttering to someone > >> the following sentence, and feeling a little confused [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Or "If you are a tall man, as I am, ..." No. That's impossibly stilted and doesn't communicate the same thing at all. SignaturePeter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net >>>> A while ago, I found myself uttering to someone >>>> the following sentence, and feeling a little confused [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > No. That's impossibly stilted and doesn't communicate the same thing at > all. The same thing as what? I thought we were trying to turn the original utterance ("If you are a tall man, like I am, ...") into English - which I have done with minimal alteration. SignatureJohn Briggs At 11:02:47 on Sun, 13 Jun 2004, John Briggs <john.briggs4@ntlworld.com> wrote in <lvWyc.253$Ee2.47@newsfe4-gui>: >>>> The English for that would be "If you're a tall man like me, ..." >>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >utterance ("If you are a tall man, like I am, ...") into English - which I >have done with minimal alteration. I'd be inclined to go for "When a man is as tall as I am..." SignatureMolly Mockford I think I've been too long on my own, but the little green goblin that lives under the sink says I'm OK - and he's never wrong, so I must be! (My Reply-To address *is* valid, though may not remain so for ever.) > >>>> A while ago, I found myself uttering to someone > >>>> the following sentence, and feeling a little confused [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > utterance ("If you are a tall man, like I am, ...") into English - which I > have done with minimal alteration. I thought we were trying to communicate the nuances of a particular thought, not just come up with grammatical sentences of similar purport to the original. SignaturePeter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net >>>>>> A while ago, I found myself uttering to someone >>>>>> the following sentence, and feeling a little confused [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > thought, not just come up with grammatical sentences of similar purport > to the original. I'll settle for grammatical :-) I thought we were translating the original utterance into English, in order to determine what the thought actually was. SignatureJohn Briggs > >>>>>> A while ago, I found myself uttering to someone > >>>>>> the following sentence, and feeling a little confused [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > I thought we were translating the original utterance into English, in order > to determine what the thought actually was. It was clear from the stated context, _and_ from the utterance as ungrammatically produced, what the speaker's intention was. All that was needed was to provide the grammatical expression for that intention. SignaturePeter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net On Friday, in article <40CA3943.5633@worldnet.att.net> > The English for that would be "If you're a tall man like me, ..." As the polar bear[1] said to the fox: "I like you, little chap". [1] Standing on a Glacier Mint. Signaturefix (vb.): 1. to paper over, obscure, hide from public view; 2. to work around, in a way that produces unintended consequences that are worse than the original problem. Usage: "Windows ME fixes many of the shortcomings of Windows 98 SE". > A while ago, I found myself uttering to someone > the following sentence, and feeling a little confused [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > ____(I said this to a woman!)____ I think that in this situation, where what's stated in the "if" clause is hypothetical, unlikely, or (as here) impossible, many speakers would use the subjunctive and/or the conditional: "If you were a tall man, like I am, you would find/would struggle/it would be hard..." In many varieties of English, the subjunctive is pretty well moribund, but there's no doubt that in the standard language you can't use what you said in the situation you describe. > Are there similar utterances in other European > languages? > > German, French, Spanish, etc. Yes. In most of them the subjunctive is still very much alive, more so than in English. They also have conditional forms similar to English. John. > > A while ago, I found myself uttering to someone > > the following sentence, and feeling a little confused [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > "If you were a tall man, like I am, you would find/would struggle/it would > be hard..." But that doesn't say the same thing at all. In your version, the speaker is asking the hearer to put themself into his place; in the original, the speaker is reflecting wryly on the drawbacks of being tall (never mind all the documented advantages of being shortness-challenged). > In many varieties of English, the subjunctive is pretty well moribund, but > there's no doubt that in the standard language you can't use what you said [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Yes. In most of them the subjunctive is still very much alive, more so than > in English. They also have conditional forms similar to English. SignaturePeter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net >>A while ago, I found myself uttering to someone >>the following sentence, and feeling a little confused [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > there's no doubt that in the standard language you can't use what you said > in the situation you describe. This is utter rubbish. Even in the situation described the sentence used by the OP is quite possible and is also grammatically correct. This usage of "you" is not areferring to the person being spoken to, but is known as the universal "you" and corresponds to the use of "one" in more formal English. This structure is also used in informal German (using "du2 instead of teh impersonal "man"), particularly by young Germans - but I don't know if this is because of the influence of English or a more deep-seated Germanic structure. Einde O'Callaghan "Einde O'Callaghan" <einde.ocallaghan@planet-interkom.de> wrote... > >>A while ago, I found myself uttering to someone > >>the following sentence, and feeling a little confused [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > known as the universal "you" and corresponds to the use of "one" in more > formal English. Point taken. I do of course frequently use this "you". Still, in my idiolect at any rate, I find the original sentence very hard to accept, presumably because of the two possible meanings of "you", one of which makes no sense in the context. I'd have found it a wee bit more acceptable, I think, if he'd said "If you're a tall man like me..." rather than "If you are a tall man, as I am..." -- perhaps because then there isn't a clash of formalness involved in taking "you" as the "universal you" (Is that what Peter was getting at?) John. > "Einde O'Callaghan" <einde.ocallaghan@planet-interkom.de> wrote... > [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > am..." -- perhaps because then there isn't a clash of formalness involved in > taking "you" as the "universal you" (Is that what Peter was getting at?) Not really; I make it grammatical rather than pragmatic. But the pragmatics does get involved. Inappropriate as well as ungrammatical! SignaturePeter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net > Point taken. I do of course frequently use this "you". Still, in my > idiolect at any rate, I find the original sentence very hard to accept, > presumably because of the two possible meanings of "you", one of which makes > no sense in the context. The formal English -- as pointed out -- is, "If one is a tall man..." but when speaking to a woman informally just leave out "man", "If you are tall, as I am, then...." > > Point taken. I do of course frequently use this "you". Still, in my > > idiolect at any rate, I find the original sentence very hard to accept, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > but when speaking to a woman informally just leave out "man", > "If you are tall, as I am, then...." That's absurd in face-to-face conversation. SignaturePeter T. Daniels grammatim@att.net > > The formal English -- as pointed out -- is, "If one is a tall man..." > > but when speaking to a woman informally just leave out "man", > > "If you are tall, as I am, then...." > > That's absurd in face-to-face conversation. Not to speak of, that the speaker was only talking about *men's* clothing. Your version implies that a woman would also find it hard to obtain clothing if she was tall -- possibly true, but not what he wanted to say. John. On Sat, 12 Jun 2004 09:23:22 GMT "John Atkinson" <johnacko@bigpond.com> wrote in <news:eYzyc.8299$sj4.3886@news-server.bigpond.net.au> in uk.culture.language.english,sci.lang,alt.usage.english: > "Einde O'Callaghan" <einde.ocallaghan@planet-interkom.de> wrote... >>>>A while ago, I found myself uttering to someone >>>>the following sentence, and feeling a little confused >>>>while saying it. >>>>"If you are a tall man, like I am, ..." >>>>(you find yourself searching for clothes that fit.) >>>>(I struggle to find clothes that fit.) >>>>(it's hard to find clothes off the rack.) >>>>____(I said this to a woman!)____ >>> I think that in this situation, where what's stated in the "if" clause >>> is >>> hypothetical, unlikely, or (as here) impossible, many speakers would use >>> the >>> subjunctive and/or the conditional: >>> "If you were a tall man, like I am, you would find/would struggle/it >>> would be hard..." >>> In many varieties of English, the subjunctive is pretty well moribund, >>> but >>> there's no doubt that in the standard language you can't use what you >>> said >>> in the situation you describe. >> This is utter rubbish. Even in the situation described the sentence used >> by the OP is quite possible and is also grammatically correct. This >> usage of "you" is not areferring to the person being spoken to, but is >> known as the universal "you" and corresponds to the use of "one" in more >> formal English. > Point taken. I do of course frequently use this "you". Still, in my > idiolect at any rate, I find the original sentence very hard to accept, > presumably because of the two possible meanings of "you", one of which makes > no sense in the context. > I'd have found it a wee bit more acceptable, I think, if he'd said "If > you're a tall man like me..." rather than "If you are a tall man, as I > am..." -- perhaps because then there isn't a clash of formalness involved in > taking "you" as the "universal you" (Is that what Peter was getting at?) I'd probably have said 'Someone as tall as I has trouble finding clothes that fit' (except that at 5' 3.5" (1.61 m) I'd be saying 'short', not 'tall'). Brian >I'd have found it a wee bit more acceptable, I think, if he'd said "If >you're a tall man like me..." As opposed to "If you're a tall man unlike a tall man like me" :) R. > >I'd have found it a wee bit more acceptable, I think, if he'd said "If > >you're a tall man like me..." > > As opposed to "If you're a tall man unlike a tall man like me" :) If you, like me, are tall ... >>> I'd have found it a wee bit more acceptable, I think, if he'd said >>> "If you're a tall man like me..." >> >> As opposed to "If you're a tall man unlike a tall man like me" :) > > If you, like me, are tall ... What's wrong with "If I were a tall man"? We need Zero Mostel to liven this up. Maria Conlon, just fiddling around. >>>>I'd have found it a wee bit more acceptable, I think, if he'd said >>>>"If you're a tall man like me..." [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > What's wrong with "If I were a tall man"? We need Zero Mostel to liven > this up. That means taht the speaker isn't tall, whereas it#s clear from the OP that the speaker is tall. Regards, Einde O'Callaghan >>>>> I'd have found it a wee bit more acceptable, I think, if he'd said >>>>> "If you're a tall man like me..." [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > That means taht the speaker isn't tall, whereas it#s clear from the OP > that the speaker is tall. My introduction of a song, and thus a possible case of STS (Stuck Tune Syndrome), didn't seem to work out quite the way I wanted. This doesn't bode well for the rest of the day. Maria Conlon Some people get nicer with age. I don't think I'm one of them. >>>>>>I'd have found it a wee bit more acceptable, I think, if he'd said >>>>>>"If you're a tall man like me..." [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > This doesn't bode well for the rest of the day. Soory, I've just picked up the reference - I wouldn't worry about you, more about me for being so slow on teh uptake. ;-) Regards, Einde O'Callaghan > A while ago, I found myself uttering to someone > the following sentence, and feeling a little confused [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > (You'd understand my confusion if you actually say it > to someone who's not a tall man.) It's colloquial for "If one is a tall man, like I am, ..." We often use "you", rather than the stuffy "one", and it rarely leads to any confusion. It is bad style, of course, to use "one" when one means "I" - an upper-class shibboleth. Adrian > > A while ago, I found myself uttering to someone > > the following sentence, and feeling a little confused [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > Adrian And anyway, shouldn't the conditional "if" phrase be using "were" instead of "am"? If you were a tall man . . . FoggyTown "It may be only your humble opinion, sir, but it happens to clash with my authoritative one." Mike Girouard wrote on 14 jun 2004 in sci.lang: > And anyway, shouldn't the conditional "if" phrase be using "were" > instead of "am"? If you were a tall man . . . were .., which unfortunately you are not are .., which could well be the case natives ?? .. if I were a rich man .. (Anatevka) SignatureEvertjan. The Netherlands. (Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress) |
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.