• Some issues from some books

    From alexander koryagin@2:5075/128.130 to All on Tue Mar 28 12:49:14 2023
    Hi, All!

    -------------------
    ...
    He meant for us to dig. I'll have Joe fetch a shovel as soon as we
    (come to him)."
    ...
    "Well, that was easy," said Kate, putting the letter away inside her
    bucket. "Now all we have to do is get there!"
    -------------------

    If I were they :) I'd write "I'll have Joe _to_ fetch a shovel" and "Now
    all we have to do is _to_ get there!"

    Why do those Infinitives are without "to"?

    Bye, All!
    Alexander Koryagin
    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
    * Origin: Usenet Network (2:5075/128.130)
  • From Ardith Hinton@1:153/716 to alexander koryagin on Thu Mar 30 21:52:12 2023
    Hi, Alexander! Recently you wrote in a message to All:

    -------------------

    He meant for us to dig. I'll have Joe fetch a shovel
    as soon as we (come to him)."

    ...

    "Well, that was easy," said Kate, putting the letter
    away inside her bucket. "Now all we have to do is get
    there!"

    -------------------

    If I were they :) I'd write "I'll have Joe _to_ fetch a
    shovel" and "Now all we have to do is _to_ get there!"



    Why do those Infinitives are without "to"?


    In formal English, the preposition is generally included where it may not always be in colloquial speech. What I see here is a private conversation (i.e. you may notice turns of phrase Miss Stickler didn't accept). That's the easy explanation for the last sentence... the other is more complex. Although it struck me as "not English" with the added preposition, I wasn't really sure why until after wading through multiple definitions of the verb "to have". It seems that if "have" means a third party will be asked &/or required to do the job the preposition is omitted, as in the first sentence you asked about. :-)




    --- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+
    * Origin: Wits' End, Vancouver CANADA (1:153/716)
  • From alexander koryagin@2:5075/128.130 to Ardith Hinton on Fri Mar 31 14:44:52 2023
    Hi, Ardith Hinton!
    I read your message from 30.03.2023 21:52

    ak>> Why do those Infinitives are without "to"?
    AH> In formal English, the preposition is generally
    AH> included where it may not always be in colloquial speech. What
    AH> I see here is a private conversation (i.e. you may notice turns of
    AH> phrase Miss Stickler didn't accept). That's the easy explanation for
    AH> the last sentence... the other is more complex. Although it struck me
    AH> as "not English" with the added preposition, I wasn't really sure why
    AH> until after wading through multiple definitions of the verb "to
    have".
    AH> It seems that if "have" means a third party will be asked &/or
    AH> required to do the job the preposition is omitted, as in the first
    AH> sentence you asked about. :-)

    Ok.
    BTW, you called those "to"s as "propositions". But prepositions are put
    before nouns? For instance, in English textbook in Russia we call those
    "to"s as particles.

    Bye, Ardith!
    Alexander Koryagin
    fido.english_tutor 2023
    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
    * Origin: Usenet Network (2:5075/128.130)
  • From Ardith Hinton@1:153/716 to alexander koryagin on Tue Apr 4 22:52:50 2023
    Hi, Alexander! Recently you wrote in a message to Ardith Hinton:

    In formal English, the preposition is generally
    included where it may not always be in colloquial
    speech. What I see here is a private conversation
    (i.e. you may notice turns of phrase Miss Stickler
    didn't accept). That's the easy explanation for
    the last sentence


    Alternatively, "to" is a "function word". In the common parlance it may be left out when the speaker decides it adds nothing worth adding.... :-Q



    ... the other is more complex. Although it struck
    me as "not English" with the added preposition, I
    wasn't really sure why until after wading through
    multiple definitions of the verb "to have". It
    seems that if "have" means a third party will be
    asked &/or required to do the job the preposition is
    omitted, as in the first sentence you asked about.

    Ok.
    BTW, you called those "to"s as "propositions". But
    prepositions are put before nouns? For instance, in
    English textbook in Russia we call those "to"s as
    particles.


    I found one source which identified them as "infinitive particles", which makes sense to me, but I avoid the use of "particle" for two reasons:

    1) From my POV there's general agreement as to the eight parts of speech
    I learned about in my youth. I know I can count on the dictionary in
    almost any European language to employ the same terminology even if I
    don't understand their idea of gender. And until you & Anton started
    asking more advanced questions the Russians seemed content... [grin].

    2) During the 1960's various linguists objected to the old rules & tried
    to make improvements... one of which I suspect may be the addition of
    the word "particle" in this context. Not all dictionaries include it
    because it's not universally accepted & if you find it at all you may
    find little or no general agreement as to what it means. At least if
    e.g. somebody adds articles to the parts of speech I get the picture,
    because I already know the term "article" as a subset of "adjective".


    I am reluctant to add unnecessary complexities here. My goal is to communicate with you as well as an indeterminate number of other people. :-)




    --- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+
    * Origin: Wits' End, Vancouver CANADA (1:153/716)
  • From Anton Shepelev@2:221/6 to Ardith Hinton on Sat Sep 30 00:11:28 2023
    Ardith Hinton:

    1) From my POV there's general agreement as to the eight parts of speech
    I learned about in my youth. I know I can count on the dictionary in
    almost any European language to employ the same terminology even if I
    don't understand their idea of gender. And until you & Anton started
    asking more advanced questions the Russians seemed content... [grin].

    2) During the 1960's various linguists objected to the old rules & tried
    to make improvements... one of which I suspect may be the addition of
    the word "particle" in this context. Not all dictionaries include it
    because it's not universally accepted & if you find it at all you may
    find little or no general agreement as to what it means. At least if
    e.g. somebody adds articles to the parts of speech I get the picture,
    because I already know the term "article" as a subset of "adjective".


    Is possible -- two perfect bricks!

    ---
    * Origin: nntp://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)
  • From Anton Shepelev@2:221/6 to alexander koryagin on Sat Sep 30 00:35:36 2023
    alexander koryagin:

    I'll have Joe fetch a shovel
    Now all we have to do is get there!

    If I were they :) I'd write "I'll have Joe _to_ fetch a shovel"
    and "Now all we have to do is _to_ get there!"

    Do you entertain similar misgivings about `let', as in "Let
    me fetch the shovel"; or about "make", as in "I will make
    you regret it"; or about `have' but with passive voice, e.g.
    "I will have my hair cut"; or when there is no a verb at
    all, as in the Huey "piano" Smith song -- "We will have him
    on the alimony"?

    The Authorised version of The Bible has both variants in the
    same sentece:

    He made him /ride/ on the high places of the earth, that
    he might eat the increase of the fields; and he made him
    /to suck/ honey out of the rock, and oil out of the
    flinty rock.

    The second sentence is different, and `to' is optional in it
    because "get there" is parallel to "do", and the second `to'
    may be implied, as it is in:

    He is the author of "The Camera" and (of) "The Negative".

    On the other hand, The Grammar of English Grammars has this
    example:

    I would willingly have him /producing/ [/produce/, or /to
    produce/] his credentials.

    ---
    * Origin: nntp://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)
  • From Alexander Koryagin@2:221/6 to Anton Shepelev on Tue Oct 3 08:48:40 2023
    Hi, Anton Shepelev!
    I read your message from 30.09.2023 00:35


    I'll have Joe fetch a shovel Now all we have to do is get there!

    If I were they :) I'd write "I'll have Joe _to_ fetch a shovel"
    and "Now all we have to do is _to_ get there!"

    Do you entertain similar misgivings about `let', as in "Let me
    fetch the shovel"; or about "make", as in "I will make you regret
    it"; or about `have' but with passive voice, e.g. "I will have my
    hair cut"; or when there is no a verb at all, as in the
    Huey "piano" Smith song -- "We will have him on the alimony"?

    A verb after "make" is used without "to" -- it is a completely different case and rule. As for "have" you gave wrong examples without verbs after "have".

    < "I will have my hair cut" >

    "Cut" is not a verb.

    Bye, Anton!
    Alexander Koryagin
    fido.english_tutor,local.cc.ak 2023

    ---
    * Origin: nntp://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)
  • From Anton Shepelev@2:221/6 to Alexander Koryagin on Thu Oct 5 21:17:16 2023
    Alexander Koryagin:

    < "I will have my hair cut" >

    "Cut" is not a verb.

    I am sure it is:

    I will have him repair my car.
    I will have my car repaired.

    `repair' is certainly a verb in both cases. You may call it
    a past participal in the second instance, because it
    partakes of the verb, or, is partially a verb. Analyse the
    present-tense example, if you like it more: "I will have her
    cut my hair," where `cut' is a verb beyond the faintest
    shadow of a doubt.

    ---
    * Origin: nntp://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)
  • From Alexander Koryagin@2:221/6 to Anton Shepelev on Fri Oct 6 16:35:28 2023
    Hi, Anton Shepelev! -> Alexander Koryagin
    I read your message from 05.10.2023 20:17

    "I will have my hair cut" >
    "Cut" is not a verb.

    I am sure it is:
    I will have him repair my car. (1)

    "Repair" is a verb, and you use the direct object here. And therefore you had to use "to" before the verb. Another example:

    "He asked me to wait a little".

    I will have my car repaired. (2)

    `repair' is certainly a verb in both cases. You may call it a past participal in the second instance,

    And indeed is is a past particiPLE. ;)

    because it partakes of the verb, or, is partially a verb.

    I don't understand your logic here.

    Analyse the present-tense example, if you
    like it more: "I will have her cut my hair," where `cut' is a verb
    beyond the faintest shadow of a doubt.

    What does Dallas think about your "beyond faintest shadow of a doubt"?

    Bye, Anton!
    Alexander Koryagin
    english_tutor 2023

    ---
    * Origin: nntp://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)
  • From Anton Shepelev@2:221/6 to Alexander Koryagin on Fri Oct 6 17:14:54 2023
    Alexander Koryagin:

    I will have him repair my car. (1)

    "Repair" is a verb, and you use the direct object here.
    And therefore you had to use "to" before the verb.

    No, I hand't. This usage needs the bare infinitive.

    "He asked me to wait a little".

    You ask someome to do something, but you have someone do it.
    There is a qulitative difference between /ask/ and /have/.

    You may call it a past participal in the second
    instance, because it partakes of the verb, or, is
    partially a verb.

    I don't understand your logic here.

    Have you wondered why it is called participle? What
    definition of participle do you use? Here is the one I use,
    by Goold Brown --

    A Participle is a word derived from a verb,
    participating the properties of a verb, and of an
    adjective or a noun; and is generally formed by adding
    /ing/, /d/, or /ed/, to the verb: thus, from the verb
    rule, are formed three participles, two simple and one
    compound; as, 1. /ruling/, 2. /ruled/, 3. /having
    ruled/.

    ---
    * Origin: nntp://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)
  • From Ardith Hinton@1:153/716 to Anton Shepelev on Thu Nov 23 20:15:30 2023
    Hi, Anton! Recently you wrote in a message to Ardith Hinton:

    At least if e.g. somebody adds articles to the parts
    of speech I get the picture, because I already know
    the term "article" as a subset of "adjective".

    Is possible -- two perfect bricks!


    Two bats with one brick? I take that as a compliment.... :-))




    --- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+
    * Origin: Wits' End, Vancouver CANADA (1:153/716)
  • From Anton Shepelev@2:221/6 to Ardith Hinton on Sun Nov 26 12:13:58 2023
    Ardith Hinton to Anton Shepelev:

    Is [it] possible -- two perfect bricks!

    Two bats with one brick? I take that as a
    compliment.... :-))

    Brick text is a colloquial term for a paragraph written in
    monospace font that is perfectly right-adjusted without
    additional whitespace. In your article from 2023-04-04
    23:52 you wrote two of them:

    1) From my POV there's general agreement as to the eight parts of speech
    I learned about in my youth. I know I can count on the dictionary in
    almost any European language to employ the same terminology even if I
    don't understand their idea of gender. And until you & Anton started
    asking more advanced questions the Russians seemed content... [grin].

    2) During the 1960's various linguists objected to the old rules & tried
    to make improvements... one of which I suspect may be the addition of
    the word "particle" in this context. Not all dictionaries include it
    because it's not universally accepted & if you find it at all you may
    find little or no general agreement as to what it means. At least if
    e.g. somebody adds articles to the parts of speech I get the picture,
    because I already know the term "article" as a subset of "adjective".

    ---
    * Origin: nntp://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)
  • From Gleb Hlebov@2:221/1 to Anton Shepelev on Mon Nov 27 11:37:25 2023
    On Sun, 26 Nov 2023 14:13:58, Anton Shepelev <0@6.221.2> wrote:

    Brick text is a colloquial term for a paragraph written in
    monospace font that is perfectly right-adjusted without
    additional whitespace. In your article from 2023-04-04
    23:52 you wrote two of them:

    Well, there are doubled spaces between sentences. But, yes -- not
    tripled or quadrupled or too wide stretches between words, like you'd
    expect in MS Word and such. And the bricks appear so neatly packed it's
    almost unreal. :-)

    --- FastEcho/2 1.46.1 Revival
    * Origin: nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland (2:221/1.0)
  • From Anton Shepelev@2:221/6 to Gleb Hlebov on Mon Nov 27 13:41:16 2023
    Gleb Hlebov to Anton Shepelev:

    Brick text is a colloquial term for a paragraph written
    in monospace font that is perfectly right-adjusted
    without additional whitespace. In your article from
    2023-04-04 23:52 you wrote two of them:

    Well, there are doubled spaces between sentences.

    This is sentence spacing -- traditionlly used in typewriting
    and in the better typographical books. If you will remember
    the book on witchcraft in Suspiria, it has sentence spacing,
    too.

    But, yes -- not tripled or quadrupled or too wide
    stretches between words, like you'd expect in MS Word
    and such. And the bricks appear so neatly packed it's
    almost unreal. :-)

    Must be harder than verse.

    ---
    * Origin: nntp://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)
  • From Anton Shepelev@2:221/6 to Anton Shepelev on Mon Nov 27 16:07:14 2023
    I wrote:

    This is sentence spacing -- traditionlly used in
    typewriting and in the better typographical books.

    Remove the article.

    ---
    * Origin: nntp://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)
  • From Gleb Hlebov@2:5023/24.4222 to Anton Shepelev on Tue Nov 28 10:44:50 2023
    Hello, Anton!

    Anton Shepelev (2:221/6) wrote to you:

    This is sentence spacing -- traditionlly used in
    typewriting and in the better typographical books.
    Remove the article.

    My brain filtered it out when I first read the message.
    But nonetheless, it have become history. :-)

    P.S. do you have any issues quote-replying my msgs? Like occasional disappearing or duplicating of characters?


    --- GoldED+/W64-MSVC 1.1.5
    * Origin: Type <sadm> to continue (2:5023/24.4222)
  • From Gleb Hlebov@2:5023/24.4222 to Anton Shepelev on Tue Nov 28 11:59:38 2023
    Hello, Anton!

    Anton Shepelev (2:221/6) wrote to me:

    Well, there are doubled spaces between sentences.
    This is sentence spacing -- traditionlly used in typewriting
    and in the better typographical books. If you will remember
    the book on witchcraft in Suspiria, it has sentence spacing,
    too.

    Which one do you have in mind? I rewatched the original 1977 movie a couple of months ago, but unsurprisingly, I took no notice of such detail and could've missed if there were any brief close-ups of a book. Because I was so much stunned by its coloring and cinematography. :-)
    If you're speaking of the remake, I have yet to watch it.

    ========
    Is the Suspiria remake worth watching?
    Dense and thematically rich, Luca Guadagnino's Suspiria is the rare remake that surpasses the original. | Rating: 4.5/5

    (rottentomatoes.com)
    ========

    Sounds good so far.


    --- GoldED+/W64-MSVC 1.1.5
    * Origin: Type <sadm> to continue (2:5023/24.4222)
  • From Anton Shepelev@2:221/6 to Gleb Hlebov on Tue Nov 28 10:51:52 2023
    Gleb Hlebov to Anton Shepelev:

    This is sentence spacing -- traditionlly used in
    typewriting and in the better typographical books. If
    you will remember the book on witchcraft in Suspiria,
    it has sentence spacing, too.

    Which one do you have in mind? I rewatched the original
    1977 movie a couple of months ago, but unsurprisingly, I
    took no notice of such detail and could've missed if
    there were any brief close-ups of a book. Because I was
    so much stunned by its coloring and cinematography. :-)

    Yes, I meant the original Suspiria, and wathed it from
    Bluray on via my projector. Increased sentence spacing is
    used in many good old books, and I think it was especially
    prominent before 1940s.

    ---
    * Origin: nntp://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)
  • From Anton Shepelev@2:221/6 to Gleb Hlebov on Tue Nov 28 10:54:14 2023
    Gleb Hlebov:

    P.S. do you have any issues quote-replying my msgs?
    Like occasional disappearing or duplicating of
    characters?

    I haven noticed any. If there are any issues, we shall see
    them in my posts.

    ---
    * Origin: nntp://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)
  • From Gleb Hlebov@2:5023/24.4222 to Anton Shepelev on Wed Nov 29 09:26:40 2023
    Hello, Anton!

    Recently, Anton Shepelev (2:221/6) wrote to me:

    This is sentence spacing -- traditionlly used in
    typewriting and in the better typographical books.
    Which one do you have in mind? I rewatched the original
    1977 movie a couple of months ago
    Yes, I meant the original Suspiria, and wathed it from
    Bluray on via my projector. Increased sentence spacing is
    used in many good old books, and I think it was especially
    prominent before 1940s.

    It's funny that you too use the trick. Although I don't think it makes
    a lot of sense with electronic messaging as long as your paragraphs not
    fully aligned.

    I guess it's about time for me to watch the movie over again. It's one
    of those unspeakable magic things that only good cinema can evoke,
    despite ridiculously wooden acting (at times) and tons of thick red
    gouache (or whatever they used for gore scenes). :-)


    --- GoldED+/W64-MSVC 1.1.5
    * Origin: Type <sadm> to continue (2:5023/24.4222)
  • From Alexander Koryagin@2:221/6 to Anton Shepelev on Wed Nov 29 09:14:26 2023
    Hi, Anton Shepelev! -> Gleb Hlebov
    I read your message from 28.11.2023 09:54

    P.S. do yu have any issuees quote-replying my msgs?
    Like occaional disappeariing or duplicatingoof
    characters?
    I haven noiced any. If thhere are any issues, we shall see
    them in my posts.

    Your quotes have a minor difference from mine - they have not a space before quoted paragraphs. Somebody told me such a space should be.

    Bye, Anton!
    Alexander Koryagin
    english_tutor 2023

    ---
    * Origin: nntp://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/6.0)
  • From Ardith Hinton@1:153/716 to Anton Shepelev on Thu Feb 22 21:00:22 2024


    --- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+
    * Origin: Wits' End, Vancouver CANADA (1:153/716)