Print

Print


Eldin Raigmore wrote:
On Thu, 2 Jul 2009 16:28:35 -0700, Paul Hartzer <[log in to unmask]> 
wrote:
>This (and your other examples) is extremely hard to parse for me, even if it's 
>technically well-formed English. Here's something that work much better for 
>me:
>"If you're going to want some pie if you finish your vegetables, you'd better 
>finish your vegetables while they're still warm."

That's parsable (sp?) for me, but still awkward. I think I'd stick in a comma after "pie"....  or substitute "provided (that)" for the second "if".  Personally, I'd only use two ifs for humor-- "We could grill steaks, if we had any charcoal, if we had any matches..."

The occasion hasn't arisen, but I suspect we'd have to rephrase, somehow, in Kash or my other 2 conlangs.
=========================
> But, as far as natlangs go, I'm mostly concerned about those languages in 
which either the protasis or the apodosis or both must be put in a 
(the?) "conditional" mood.

Of course in Spanish, the pro. is subjunctive, the apo. is conditional (or sometimes subjunctive too, just for fun). I think they can both be indicative in some cases ("if Obama had a news conference (si...dio una conferencia), I didn't listen to it (no la escuché)" implying that perhaps there was a news conference but in any case I didn't hear it; very different from "si...diera...., no la escucharía (if he _should_ give.... I wouldn't listen.... or, if he gives....I won't listen)
=======================

> English doesn't require either the protasis or the apodosis to be put in 
a "conditional" mood.  Modern English doesn't have a conditional mood;...

No, but we can insert things like "should, were to..." as in the ex. above. And some of us still demand the "subjunctive" in "if I _were_ you, I wouldn't do that" and similar.
=======================

> Speaking of such things, how about:
"that that"
"had had"
"is is"
the first two of which come up in "correct" written English, the third in informal 
colloquial spoken English?
================
Do you have in mind such things as "he said _that that_ would be wrong" ? That's a case of conjunction "that" plus dem.pron. "that". I can't think of a case where both "that"s are the conjuction......

"had had" is simply past perfect, isn't it?. No problem.

"is is" I suppose from the famous "...what the meaning of is is"  That's a case of 
"...what the meaning of is(NOUN) is(VERB)" perfectly normal if you substitute any other word in the NOUN slot (or, in writing, put quotes around it).