Mailing List Archive
tlug.jp Mailing List tlug archive tlug Mailing List Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]Re: [Lingo] Complex sentense
- Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 12:18:04 +0900
- From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@example.com>
- Subject: Re: [Lingo] Complex sentense
- References: <CACvCDgYcxAYt5vX_kTSeBa1NG6w_dZwhogMg-8RvEWbcZchVZQ@mail.gmail.com> <87ip8o4myy.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <CACvCDgbEprDOALwnzvyixck6zYx18+FF5J--J6YU0euGHjYF9Q@mail.gmail.com>
Nguyễn Vũ Hưng writes: > > as a simpler rephrasing of the factual content. But it would be very > > unusual to actually write or say it this way. > > Can you point out which part of the sentence is unusual? No part is unusual. The whole thing is. More on that below. > > The translation into Japanese would vary dramatically depending > > on the speaker's relationship to "you", > "You", in this sentence, is the project manager who is managing the > project. Yeah, that's obvious from the content of the sentence. The problem is, who is the *speaker*? Here are some possible combinations of speaker and continuation for the *original* sentence: Accountant: How much more are you going to need to complete project? Hands-off boss: So you're pretty much done. How's the project look? Trouble-shooting boss: So you're in trouble, right? How far along is the project, and how much do you need to get it done? Angry boss I: And you haven't done JACK[1]! You're FIRED! Angry boss II: And you haven't done JACK! We need this done, but all expenditures from now on need my approval. GOT THAT?! Happy boss I: So you've come in under budget. GREAT job! Happy boss II: See? You can do it. OK, that $2000 consultant was a big mistake, but you came in under budget after all, and only two weeks late. In contrast, only the accountant would use the rephrasing I proposed. And it's unlikely that an accountant would be involved in this, except as an advisor to the boss. > > you've spent US $22000 of your budget to complete work > > that you originally expected would cost US $24000. > > -> "that you (originally) expected *to* cost US $24000" is the correct > and simpler English? It's correct and simpler. "Would" is also correct, and expresses the nuance that "you" felt the $24,000 estimate was imprecise, and the speaker knew that and accepts the imprecision. If t Linguistically speaking, "would" puts the clause about expectation into the subjunctive mood. If you don't know what that means, it's English's way of expressing doubt or indeterminism in a statement (more or less -- David can probably give a more exact definition). Somewhat like Japanese "deshou" forms. Footnotes: [1] "Haven't done jack [shit]" is an expression of extreme contempt for the performance of somebody who has failed at a task, often for lack of effort, sometimes for lack of talent or skill. You probably won't see it in a management text or problem set posted on the web. :-)
- References:
- [Lingo] Complex sentense
- From: Nguyễn Vũ Hưng
- [Lingo] Complex sentense
- From: Stephen J. Turnbull
- Re: [Lingo] Complex sentense
- From: Nguyễn Vũ Hưng
Home | Main Index | Thread Index
- Prev by Date: Re: [Lingo] Complex sentense
- Next by Date: Re: [Lingo] Complex sentense
- Previous by thread: Re: [Lingo] Complex sentense
- Next by thread: Re: [Lingo] Complex sentense
- Index(es):
Home Page Mailing List Linux and Japan TLUG Members Links