| Author |
Message |
Wind Young
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 10:19 pm
Post subject: Would you mind telling me whether these sentences are correc |
|
|
Today I wrote some sentences, but I don't know whether they are correct and
whether they agree with your habits.
Here are these sentences:
1. The reality which we have to confront with is no so much enjoying the
reward of the life as enjoying the progression of the life.
2. The truth that love, happiness, along with the pain are so precious dawns
on me, because of those are the flags of the existing of the life.
3. Don't be indifferent to those are inexpressable.
4. He who is always preoccupied with his own business can't be happy.
5. Ideals are worth pursuing because they are of enduring worth.
6. He observes all things in perspective.
7. It is impossible that enemies are reconciled to their failures.
Thanks for your reading these clumsy sentences. There must be many faults.
Please correct them or write another for me.
Thanks again.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bob
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 30, 2005 11:36 pm
Post subject: Re: Would you mind telling me whether these sentences are co |
|
|
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 23:19:11 +0800, Wind Young wrote:
| Quote: | Today I wrote some sentences, but I don't know whether they are correct
and whether they agree with your habits.
Here are these sentences:
|
| Quote: | 1. The reality which we have to confront with is no so much enjoying the
reward of the life as enjoying the progression of the life.
|
"In reality, happiness is not so much enjoying the reward of the life as
enjoying the progression of the life."
(I can only assume that happiness is the goal since there is no stated
goal or purpose for confronting anything in the original sentence. Also, I
would leave off the "In reality," unless it is used to contrast something
said in an earlier sentence.)
| Quote: | 2. The truth that love, happiness, along with the pain are so precious
dawns on me, because of those are the flags of the existing of the life.
|
The truth that love and happiness, along with the pain are so precious
dawns on me. Because those are the reasons for living.
(I really don't know how to rephrase the last sentence because I can't
understand your original. If I did understand I might not have broken your
sentence into two.)
| Quote: | 3. Don't be indifferent to those are inexpressable.
|
Don't be indifferent to that which is inexpressable.
| Quote: | 4. He who is always preoccupied with his own business can't be happy.
|
(Looks OK to me.)
| Quote: | 5. Ideals are worth pursuing because they are of enduring worth.
|
(Looks OK to me.)
| Quote: | 6. He observes all things in perspective.
|
(Looks OK to me but I probably would say "sees" instead of "observes".)
| Quote: | 7. It is impossible that enemies are reconciled to their failures.
|
It is impossible that the enemies are reconciled to their failures.
(I add "the" because I don't think we can be assured of the impossibility
of *all* enemies being reconciled to their failures but we might be able
to make a definitive statement about specific enemies, i.e. "the" enemies
under discussion.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bill Bonde ('by a commodi
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:16 am
Post subject: Re: Would you mind telling me whether these sentences are co |
|
|
Bob wrote:
| Quote: |
4. He who is always preoccupied with his own business can't be happy.
(Looks OK to me.)
Wouldn't it be nice if you could show it as a restrictive or non |
restrictive clause by putting a comma before the "who" but could always
include a comma before the main verb to help the reader figure out where
it bloody is? This unbalanced comma-ing to show pauses is how one
actually reads the text.
--
Had Tolstoy confined himself to war or peace, he could have been
finished in seven hundred and fifty pages.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 1:31 am
Post subject: Re: Would you mind telling me whether these sentences are co |
|
|
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:16:14 -0800, Bill Bonde ('by a commodius vicus of
recirculation') wrote:
| Quote: |
Bob wrote:
4. He who is always preoccupied with his own business can't be happy.
(Looks OK to me.)
Wouldn't it be nice if you could show it as a restrictive or non
restrictive clause by putting a comma before the "who" but could always
include a comma before the main verb to help the reader figure out where
it bloody is? This unbalanced comma-ing to show pauses is how one actually
reads the text.
|
Compare and contrast:
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
"Let he, who is without sin, cast the first stone."
I read the original as being paralell in structure to the first of those
quotes.
Bob |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Donna Richoux
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 2:03 am
Post subject: Re: Would you mind telling me whether these sentences are co |
|
|
Bob <bob@dont.spam.me> wrote:
| Quote: | Compare and contrast:
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
"Let he, who is without sin, cast the first stone."
I read the original as being paralell in structure to the first of those
quotes.
|
Except, unfortunately, that it is neither one. It can't be "Let he",
contrary to popular opinion.
The King James Version has:
KJV John 8:7 When therefore they continued asking
him, he lifted up himself, and said to them, He that
is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone
at her.
The Revised Standard Version (1962) relegates John 8:1-11 to a footnote
(meaning it is of dubious authenticity) and has:
"And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and
said to them, 'Let him who is without sin among you
be the first to throw a stone at her.'"
--
Best wishes -- Donna Richoux |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skitt
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 2:25 am
Post subject: Re: Would you mind telling me whether these sentences are co |
|
|
Bob wrote:
| Quote: | Wind Young wrote:
Today I wrote some sentences, but I don't know whether they are
correct and whether they agree with your habits.
Here are these sentences:
1. The reality which we have to confront with is no so much enjoying
the reward of the life as enjoying the progression of the life.
"In reality, happiness is not so much enjoying the reward of the life
as enjoying the progression of the life."
(I can only assume that happiness is the goal since there is no stated
goal or purpose for confronting anything in the original sentence.
Also, I would leave off the "In reality," unless it is used to
contrast something said in an earlier sentence.)
|
I think that what was meant was something like this:
The reality we have to confront is not so much enjoying
the reward of life as enjoying the progression of life.
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bill Bonde ('by a commodi
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 3:19 am
Post subject: Re: Would you mind telling me whether these sentences are co |
|
|
Bob wrote:
| Quote: |
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 10:16:14 -0800, Bill Bonde ('by a commodius vicus of
recirculation') wrote:
Bob wrote:
4. He who is always preoccupied with his own business can't be happy.
(Looks OK to me.)
Wouldn't it be nice if you could show it as a restrictive or non
restrictive clause by putting a comma before the "who" but could always
include a comma before the main verb to help the reader figure out where
it bloody is? This unbalanced comma-ing to show pauses is how one actually
reads the text.
Compare and contrast:
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
"Let he, who is without sin, cast the first stone."
I read the original as being paralell in structure to the first of those
quotes.
I agree that it is a restrictive clause, the non-restrictive clause |
version having a meaning very different in this case. The restrictive
clause version should have, by rule, no commas. The problem is that
there is a slight pause before the verb when the material is read which
exists to hint that the clause is done and the main verb has arrived.
That is where I want to use the unbalanced comma if the restrictive
relative clause is so long that confusion might result. Of course even
contemplating this is all highly illegal.
--
Had Tolstoy confined himself to war or peace, he could have been
finished in seven hundred and fifty pages. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Charles Riggs
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 3:32 am
Post subject: Re: Would you mind telling me whether these sentences are co |
|
|
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 20:03:56 +0100, trio@euronet.nl (Donna Richoux)
wrote:
| Quote: | Bob <bob@dont.spam.me> wrote:
Compare and contrast:
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
"Let he, who is without sin, cast the first stone."
I read the original as being paralell in structure to the first of those
quotes.
Except, unfortunately, that it is neither one. It can't be "Let he",
contrary to popular opinion.
|
It *can* be, Big Mama, if someone cares to translate it that way.
--
Charles Riggs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don Phillipson
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 3:38 am
Post subject: Re: Would you mind telling me whether these sentences are co |
|
|
"Bob" <bob@dont.spam.me> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.10.30.16.37.10.832311@dont.spam.me...
| Quote: | On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 23:19:11 +0800, Wind Young wrote:
Today I wrote some sentences, but I don't know whether they are correct
and whether they agree with your habits.
Here are these sentences:
1. The reality which we have to confront with is no so much enjoying the
reward of the life as enjoying the progression of the life.
"In reality, happiness is not so much enjoying the reward of the life as
enjoying the progression of the life."
|
This is an incomplete revision. EFL speakers write
about "the progress (not progression) of life (not the life.)"
Wrong use of the definite article often betrays foreigners
writing about the life or the love or the sport. EFL speakers
write about life, love or sport.
--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Lieblich
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 6:33 am
Post subject: Re: Would you mind telling me whether these sentences are co |
|
|
"Bill Bonde wrote:
| Quote: |
Bob wrote:
Bill Bonde wrote:
Bob wrote:
4. He who is always preoccupied with his own business can't be happy.
(Looks OK to me.)
Wouldn't it be nice if you could show it as a restrictive or non
restrictive clause by putting a comma before the "who" but could always
include a comma before the main verb to help the reader figure out where
it bloody is? This unbalanced comma-ing to show pauses is how one actually
reads the text.
Compare and contrast:
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
"Let he, who is without sin, cast the first stone."
I read the original as being paralell in structure to the first of those
quotes.
I agree that it is a restrictive clause, the non-restrictive clause
version having a meaning very different in this case. The restrictive
clause version should have, by rule, no commas. The problem is that
there is a slight pause before the verb when the material is read which
exists to hint that the clause is done and the main verb has arrived.
That is where I want to use the unbalanced comma if the restrictive
relative clause is so long that confusion might result. Of course even
contemplating this is all highly illegal.
|
Contemplation is permitted. Getting the wrong answer isn't. The
relative clause in the example sentences is far too short to justify
an intonation comma between "sin" and "cast." Only if the speaker is
running out of breath (literally if speaking, in the mind's ear
otherwise) at the end of the restrictive clause should a comma be
contemplated. The very slight hesitation after "sin" (so short that I
can barely detect it in my own "reading aloud" of the sentence) is
grossly inadequate to the task.
And I agree thoroughly with Donna and those others who pointed out
that it should be "Let him," not "Let he."
--
Bob Lieblich
Not at all hesitant |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 6:48 am
Post subject: Re: Would you mind telling me whether these sentences are co |
|
|
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 15:38:45 -0500, Don Phillipson wrote:
| Quote: | "Bob" <bob@dont.spam.me> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.10.30.16.37.10.832311@dont.spam.me...
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 23:19:11 +0800, Wind Young wrote:
Today I wrote some sentences, but I don't know whether they are
correct and whether they agree with your habits. Here are these
sentences:
1. The reality which we have to confront with is no so much enjoying
the reward of the life as enjoying the progression of the life.
"In reality, happiness is not so much enjoying the reward of the life as
enjoying the progression of the life."
This is an incomplete revision. EFL speakers write about "the progress
(not progression) of life (not the life.)"
|
I kinda like "progression", actually.
| Quote: |
Wrong use of the definite article often betrays foreigners writing about
the life or the love or the sport. EFL speakers write about life, love or
sport.
|
Agreed 100%. Believe me I intended to leave out "the" in both cases
before "life". Not sure how it got into my revision except that I started
with a cut-n-paste and got hung up on dealing with "confront with".
Bob. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 7:13 am
Post subject: Re: Would you mind telling me whether these sentences are co |
|
|
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 20:03:56 +0100, Donna Richoux wrote:
| Quote: | Bob <bob@dont.spam.me> wrote:
Compare and contrast:
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." "Let he, who is
without sin, cast the first stone."
I read the original as being paralell in structure to the first of those
quotes.
Except, unfortunately, that it is neither one. It can't be "Let he",
contrary to popular opinion.
|
Hmm. Not sure I agree with that. "he who is without sin" is a perfectly
good noun phrase so it fits right in with "Let <noun> throw the first
stone".
| Quote: |
The King James Version has:
KJV John 8:7 When therefore they continued asking him, he lifted up
himself, and said to them, He that is without sin among you, let him
first cast a stone at her.
|
So my example wasn't an exact quote from this version (translation) of
the Bible. None the less it is a very common expression and perfectly
gramitacal, in my opinion. Your quote above also uses the nearly identical
phrase ("he that is without sin among you") as a noun phrase as well, even
though the quote is different.
I Googled "he who is" and found that "Let he who is without sin" used in
many places, including a bible-study site. It was the title of a Star
Treck episode. It was used in a review of Sin City. "Let he who is without
brains" was used in a review of the Jerry Springer Show. "Let he whose
buffer has never overflowed cast the first aspersion" was used in a
discussion of security exposures in software.
Another bible quote (Book of revalations chapter 22):
Let he who is unjust be unjust still, the filthy be filthy still
Here is a similar quote:
He who is kind to the poor lends to the Lord, and He will reward him for
what he has done.
Proverbs 19:17
And some more from a translatopn of an Egyptian script:
Verily, he who is yonder will be a living god,
Averting the ill of him who does it
Many others can be found.
| Quote: |
The Revised Standard Version (1962) relegates John 8:1-11 to a footnote
(meaning it is of dubious authenticity) and has:
"And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them,
'Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone
at her.'"
|
Not sure about this one ("let him who ..."). Google shows lots of
references but I honestly don't remember ever hearing it before. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pat Durkin
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 7:36 am
Post subject: Re: Would you mind telling me whether these sentences are co |
|
|
"Bob" <bob@dont.spam.me> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.10.31.00.14.18.70433@dont.spam.me...
| Quote: | On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 20:03:56 +0100, Donna Richoux wrote:
Bob <bob@dont.spam.me> wrote:
Compare and contrast:
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." "Let he, who
is
without sin, cast the first stone."
I read the original as being paralell in structure to the first of
those
quotes.
Except, unfortunately, that it is neither one. It can't be "Let he",
contrary to popular opinion.
Hmm. Not sure I agree with that. "he who is without sin" is a
perfectly
good noun phrase so it fits right in with "Let <noun> throw the first
stone".
The King James Version has:
KJV John 8:7 When therefore they continued asking him, he
lifted up
himself, and said to them, He that is without sin among you, let
him
first cast a stone at her.
So my example wasn't an exact quote from this version (translation) of
the Bible. None the less it is a very common expression and perfectly
gramitacal, in my opinion.
|
It is a "subjunctive usage", as in imperative.
Let him. . .
Have him. . .
Make him. . .
"Have him shut the door."
Let me go, lover.
Let me be first.
Make her shut up.
All very grammatical. The clause "who is without sin" simply modifies
the proposed actor.
You wouldn't say, "Make he shut the door", so "Let he shut the door who
has drawn the short straw". No. You would say "Let him shut the door".
Thus, "Let him throw the first stone".
| Quote: | The Revised Standard Version (1962) relegates John 8:1-11 to a
footnote
(meaning it is of dubious authenticity) and has:
"And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them,
'Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a
stone
at her.'"
Not sure about this one ("let him who ..."). Google shows lots of
references but I honestly don't remember ever hearing it before.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J. W. Love
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 7:56 am
Post subject: Re: Would you mind telling me whether these sentences are co |
|
|
Bob wrote:
| Quote: | Another bible quote (Book of revalations
|
Oy!
| Quote: | chapter 22):
Let he who is unjust be unjust still, the filthy be filthy still
|
Not in the KJV, which has: "He that is unjust, let him be unjust still"
(Rev. 22:11). And how about Rev. 22:17: "And let him that heareth say,
Come. And let him that is athirst come"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skitt
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2005 8:06 am
Post subject: Re: Would you mind telling me whether these sentences are co |
|
|
Bob wrote:
[to Pat Durkin]
| Quote: | Also consider:
"He who is without sin is a rarity."
|
That's fine. "He is", not "him is".
| Quote: | What about "He/him who drew the last straw may shut the door." I see
"Let ... shut the door" as saying the same thing.
|
The idea is the same, but not the sentence structure. "He ... may shut the
door." "Let him shut the door.'
| Quote: | But you've got me thinking now that I don't know what is really
correct.
|
You don't appear to.
| Quote: | Your explanations are very persuasive but they conflict with
my "ear".
|
Well, see how you are?
| Quote: | And the "Let he ..." phrase shows up all over the place.
|
Yup. Many people are misguided in certain English usages. Some versions of
the bible can be blamed for that.
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in