| Re: a question about "be careful" |
Wanadoo, l'internet avec .. |
| John of Aix (j.murphy@nospamlibertysurf.fr) |
2004/06/19 11:52 |
Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: "John of Aix" <j.murphy@nospamlibertysurf.fr>
Newsgroups: alt.languages.english
Subject: Re: a question about "be careful"
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2004 19:52:30 +0200
Organization: Wanadoo, l'internet avec France Telecom
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <cb22h7$jkr$1@news-reader5.wanadoo.fr>
References: <c9bqe7$1g3j$1@mail.cn99.com> <c9c3mr$gj0$1@news-reader5.wanadoo.fr> <5778ec55.0406180822.59934aa1@posting.google.com> <cb0qpc$olu$1@news-reader2.wanadoo.fr> <5778ec55.0406190930.743ab44c@posting.google.com>
Reply-To: "John of Aix" <j.murphy@nospamlibertysurf.fr>
NNTP-Posting-Host: mix-avignon-205-4-130.w80-9.abo.wanadoo.fr
X-Trace: news-reader5.wanadoo.fr 1087671655 20123 80.9.95.130 (19 Jun 2004 19:00:55 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@wanadoo.fr
NNTP-Posting-Date: 19 Jun 2004 19:00:55 GMT
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.languages.english:377
5778ec55.0406190930.743ab44c@posting.google.com...
> "John of Aix" <j.murphy@nospamlibertysurf.fr> wrote in message
news:<cb0qpc$olu$1@news-reader2.wanadoo.fr>...
> > I beg to differ.
> >
> > I can't reply to the rest as you have cut the context and I can't
remember
> > it.
>
> Oops. I'm sorry. Here is the original sentence:
>
> "Doris, be careful that the water is not hot," Smith said.
>
> I can see where it might technically be interpreted as you say, but
> this would be a silly way for a native speaker to express it. It
> sounds like the way a foreigner might warn Doris about hot water (I
> can even hear the accent as I read it).
No, that phrase doesn't bother me at all I can here anyone of my relations
saying it. The 'too' to make it 'too hot' is understood.
>
> I would probably say it, "Doris, be careful of that water; it may be
> hot", or, "Doris, be careful; that water may be [too] hot".
That isn't quite the same as it implies a particular case, some change in
normal circumstance. I may be imagining the nuance of course and you are
perfectly free to ignore it.
>
> The way it is stated implies that Doris has control over the water as
> to whether it is hot or not and that is what she should be careful
> about. It does not appear that she is being warned about the water
> itself.
Doris does have control, she turns the taps on and off ergo the temperature
of the water.
>
> It's an idiomatic thing. The sentence makes perfect sense one way and
> sounds strange and unnatural the other way to a native English
> speaker.
Not to me it doesn't though I admit I have gone thoroughly native over the
years so that I sometimes use and accept 'Frenchisms' as perfectly good
English.
|
|
|