Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2014 February 8

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

February 8

Any difference between "Don't you know it?" & "Do you not know it?"?

Is there any difference between "Don't you know it?" & "Do you not know it?"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.221.150.157 (talk) 02:59, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

There's no difference of literal of meaning. "Do you not know it?" has a contrastive emphasis. "Don't you know it?" is a straight-out simple question. But if you asked someone "Do you know her opinion?" And they hesitated, "Well..." you might then say, "Well, do you not know it?" Otherwise the uncontracted form is very formal and old fashioned and would not be found in normal speech or even most writing. μηδείς (talk) 03:34, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Why "Somebody said" and the quotation in separate lines?

In novels, I often find "Somebody said" and his or her quotation in separate lines,but I don't know why.For example, Linton cried out:

   "You can't do it!"  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.221.150.157 (talk) 03:06, 8 February 2014 (UTC) 

Is the formatting above what you intended? Can you refer to a common edition of a common book available in English speaking countries that gives an example of this? Diaog is often given on alternating lines without the speaker identified after the first line:

John said, "Are you coming?"

"Of course," Mary replied.

"Then hurry up."

"Why, are you afraid your wife is about to walk in on us?"

But I cannot think of a common format where "somebody" and what they say are on separate lines. μηδείς (talk) 03:26, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Can "cannot but do sth." & "cannot help doing sth." be used interchangeably?

Can "cannot but do sth." & "cannot help doing sth." be used interchangeably? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.221.150.157 (talk) 03:13, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

They are almost identical in meaning, but they don't have the same connotation. You might say "I cannot but tell the truth, I don't love you any more." to say something you wished you didn't have to say. "I cannot help my midnight-snacking habit" means it is truly involuntary, out of one's control entirely. You wouldn't say, "I cannot help telling you I don't ove you anymore" unless it was untrue, and you did still love the person, but you had some psychological disorder that forced you to say such things. μηδείς (talk) 03:21, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

"Cannot but" has a sense of "only" that "cannot help doing" does not have. "I cannot but eat at midnight" would mean to me that at midnight I can only eat, and "I cannot eat but at midnight" would mean that I could eat only at midnight. I think this ties into a broader construction with a verb+but - "I have but three" ("I only have three") or "I didn't make it but eight miles" ("I only made it eight miles"). It's a tricky little construction, now that I think about it - the placement of "but" is very important. I have not done a formal study, but I think that sometimes this form might sound a little archaic, formal, or dialectical - I don't think everybody uses it.Falconus^{p t c} 04:04, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

in the hot sun or under the hot sun

Which is correct:in the hot sun or under the hot sun? Or both? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.221.150.157 (talk) 03:28, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Both. There's the famous quote, "Only mad dogs and Englishmen go out in the midday son." I don't know its origin. μηδείς (talk) 03:48, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Give credit to Noël Coward for "Mad dogs and Englishmen go out in the midday sun". I don't know about "Only mad dogs and Englishmen go out in the midday son." :) Bielle (talk) 04:59, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

The mipselling's all part of my campaign to ruin the ref desks and drive away users. :) μηδείς (talk) 05:12, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Really? What does a mip sell for these days?--Jeffro77 (talk) 10:25, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Good one. μηδείς (talk) 03:28, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

You left off the intro and a comma: "Only mad dogs... I say, only mad dogs and Englishman go out in the midday, son." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:33, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Is "go into the night on her way back home" good English?

Is "go into the night on her way back home" good English? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.221.150.157 (talk) 03:41, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

No. And "she goes into the night on her way back home" is no better. The verb doesn't work. "She walked/drove off..." or "she walked/drove away into the night" is good. μηδείς (talk) 03:51, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

You are assuming past tense... It could be that she is going into the night on her way back home, or that she routinely goes into the night on her way back home. These sentences sound a little odd to me (I don't like the verb "to go" - it strikes me as imprecise), but there is no inherent reason that the sentences have to be in the past tense. Falconus^{p t c} 03:55, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

No, tense is irrelevant, I made no such assumption or implication, and the answer is the same in the present. The verb is the problem, and that's exactly what I said. μηδείς (talk) 05:08, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

If you read this as part of a longer phrase or sentence it makes sense. As in "She chose to go into the night on her way back home". So yes it is good English but needs something else to make it clear. --TammyMoet (talk) 13:20, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that's a point that needs to be made clear. Most short, not-entirely-malformed phrases can be made into something that makes sense, if put into the right context. I wonder if we have an article on that. μηδείς (talk) 23:39, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Why do I think this is part of a line from a rock ballad? —Tamfang (talk) 04:09, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

A combination of large album collection and a misspent youth? μηδείς (talk) 01:07, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

And yet I wouldn't expect to find such a line in my collection. —Tamfang (talk) 08:22, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

She clapped her hands: "That's great!"

Can I use a colon after "She clapped her hands" to introduce what she said? For example,"She clapped her hands: "That's great!" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.221.150.157 (talk) 03:47, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

No. Use either a semicolon or a full stop (i.e., period). A colon introduces a list or an example, such as "There are three answers: a, b, and c" or "Read the following:" μηδείς (talk) 03:54, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

He greeted me, "Good morning."

In the following sentence, He greeted me, "Good morning." is the comma used correctly to introduce the quotation? Or should a colon be used instead? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.221.150.157 (talk) 04:15, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

This is correct. Please stop asking the same question. μηδείς (talk) 05:05, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

The apples sold away turned into money.

Is there anything wrong with the sentence "The apples sold away turned into money."? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.221.150.157 (talk) 04:04, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

It's not a normal phrase. 'The apples were sold for money' or 'the apples were sold in exchange for money', or 'we made a profit on the apples sold' would work. μηδείς (talk) 04:09, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict):I think it would be better to say "The sale of the apples turned a profit". If you mean that literally (the apple turns into gold or something), consider "The apples that were sold turned into money." Falconus^{p t c} 04:12, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

That's horrible. The apples that were sold did not "turn into money". Unless you mean the buyer found the fruit he was holding turned into coins. μηδείς (talk) 05:10, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

That's exactly what I meant. I said, "If you mean that literally (the apple turns into gold or something)". I offered two suggestions. One was for what I thought the OP probably meant and the other was a literal interpretation of what the OP said in case I was wrong. Falconus^{p t c} 12:20, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

The lack of a period after profit made me think "if you mean that literally" went with the words preceding that phrase, not the words following. μηδείς (talk) 18:09, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I fixed it. Falconus^{p t c} 00:22, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

List of items and punctuation

"except for the consents, approvals, authorizations or other actions by, and filings with and notifications to, the Office of the Comptroller"

This is from a corporate law document so I assume the punctuation is correct but I'm confused by what rules of grammar govern the punctuation. Like "and filings with and notifications to" doesn't seem intuitive. Isn't this a list of 3 groups? Gullabile (talk) 08:28, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I think this is a case of a serial comma being omitted. That's usual e.g. in German (you always append the last element with just the "und" or "oder"), but optional in English. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 09:14, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Depends on which comma you're talking about. I think "filings with and notifications to" is one unit, and "consents, approvals, authorizations or other actions by" is another, and both have "the Office of the Comptroller" as the object of the preoposition. I typically use the serial comma, so I would put one after "authorizations", but not after "filings with". If I've understood the intended structure.

Of course, when it gets that convoluted, it's ordinarily better to reword. --Trovatore (talk) 09:25, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I didn't see it as two units but now that makes sense and is clear. But about rewording. How could a sentence like this be reworded and still have the style used by the corporate bar? Gullabile (talk) 09:41, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Don't ask me. I feel your pain. But to me, that's like saying, "how can I get rid of this headache, but keep hitting myself on the head?" --Trovatore (talk) 10:10, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

It might be more technically correct to omit the commata after by and to, but the first one helps alert the reader that the noun governed by by comes later – after the next comma. —Tamfang (talk) 04:14, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

on the river beach

Is "on the river beach" acceptable in English? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.249.210.200 (talk) 08:52, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes but needs context. So you might ask "Where is the archaeological dig that found the ancient footprints?" to which the answer "On the river beach." would be short but acceptable.--TammyMoet (talk) 13:21, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

In English, "beach" is usually reserved for fairly wide expanses of sand/gravel/rock with limited vegetation; if you're describing a situation where people are frolicking at the grassy edge of a river, you'd probably say something like "on the river bank" instead. Matt Deres (talk) 13:56, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

In British English, "foreshore" would be more commonly used for the margin of a river. Alansplodge (talk) 16:57, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Here is a reference for my statement above - Metal Detecting and Digging on the Thames Foreshore. Alansplodge (talk) 00:32, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

• "River beach" is not an idiomatic phrase in English. It would be understood, but sound odd. As Matt mentions, the normal term is riverbank. One might say the riverbank formed a beach, or on the beach on the riverbank. μηδείς (talk) 18:05, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

To me, a bank is steep and a beach is not, so they don't go together well. —Tamfang (talk) 04:16, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

This is another word that has two linguistic senses. Google gives

the land alongside or sloping down to a river or lake.
"willows lined the bank"
synonyms: edge, side, shore, coast, embankment, bankside, levee, border, verge, boundary, margin, rim, fringe

so one could say either, "there was an airplane runway along the riverbank", or "he fell off the riverbank to his death" with equal success and two different images of a flat or a steep edge. μηδείς (talk) 19:07, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

BTW, "River Beach" sounds very poetic, and if you do a search on it, you will find it is used as the proper name of pubs, marinas, housing developments, and a school in the UK. It would be a great name for an actress. μηδείς (talk) 19:07, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

• In my youth, we would go swimming off beachlike sandbars in the Mississippi River (see the last image in the Sandbar article). I suppose one could call them (river) beaches, but no one ever did—they were just called sandbars. Deor (talk) 18:47, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

There are also the artificial Paris-Plages, but I agree that "river beach" is unidiomatic (though understandable). AndrewWTaylor (talk) 22:41, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

What a taste

Can "What a taste!" be used to express the idea of "How delicious!"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.249.210.200 (talk) 09:03, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

No. It sounds very odd. "How tasty!" would work. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:22, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I think "What a taste!" is an OK English sentence, but it could have either a positive or a negative meaning, depending on how it's spoken. Seeing the written sentence in isolation (without surrounding context) might incline towards a negative interpretation... AnonMoos (talk) 12:12, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

This sounds like something you might hear in a restaurant kitchen where a chef cooks five different versions of a sauce and the manager tries them and one is so good he exclaims, "What a taste!" I agree w/AnonMoos it makes sense, and with Clarity that it would be an odd thing to say in a normal circumstance like eating at a friend's house. μηδείς (talk) 18:18, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

It's structurally OK, and, as AnonMoos says, could conceivably mean either good or bad, but I agree with Clarityfiend. A chef whose first language was not English might use it to mean "good"; a chef whose first language was English would more likely just say "Wow" (or "Fantastic", or "Mmmm"), followed by a more analytic description for a good taste, and either spitting noises or just "No" for a bad sauce. For some reason I'm now thinking of a comedy Italian chef saying "Aaai, what a taaeste" in an exaggerated Italian accent. Chefs aside, "what a taste" wouldn't really be used in normal English to mean either good or bad unless for something very extreme, say a raw chilli. Tonywalton ^Talk 01:27, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Agreed with "Wow" or "Fantastic" or "Mmmm". I was going to give the example "Mmmm, this is great. You have to give me the recipe". μηδείς (talk) 19:10, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

On the other hand, an English-speaker might approvingly say "What flavor!" (no article). —Tamfang (talk) 04:28, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

"What a flavour" sounds more appealing than "what a taste", in the same way that "what an aroma" sounds more appealing than "what a smell".--Jeffro77 (talk) 10:19, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

A very long time ago I lived in Germany for a while (long enough ago that I could visit the Berlin Wall). German people I met there, who spoke better English than I, said that one of the most difficult aspects of the English language was that English often has several words for a single thing that look to be functionally identical in terms of dictionary definitions but are subtly different in terms of the way they're actually used. "Aroma/smell" (and odo(u)r) are a good example of that. Oh, and "fragrance". And "perfume", and "scent". I have six words in English there where, German, for instance has two (Duft or Geruch). Tonywalton ^Talk 23:06, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that's a point I bring up when mentioning that English is the world's best language. μηδείς (talk) 01:05, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

A German-English dictionary also gives Aroma, Parfüm, Gestank, Wohlgeruch.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 19:40, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

By Granthar's Spatula, what a taste! MChesterMC (talk) 10:15, 10 February 2014 (UTC)