Error during command authentication.

Error - unable to initiate communication with LISTSERV (errno=111). The server is probably not started. LISTSERV 16.5 - CONLANG Archives

Print

Print


>
> Another time I would this construction would be when the second clause was
> contrary to expectations. For example “it was a very dirty game of football
> with 11 yellow cards given and two guys sent off, but after they all went
> to the pub together and got along fine.


 I would *definitely *say "afterwards." "After" sounds totally wrong,
unless you were to say "After the game;" but just "after" with no noun is
wrong-sounding.

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 10:59 AM, Gage Amonette <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> I went to the
>> chemist ... after ... I went to the post office"
>
>
> I am also from the Pacific Northwest ;), and this sounds fine (maybe it's
> that I live in Eastern Washington). That is, I wouldn't consciously detect
> anything wrong with it, although I would probably be more inclined to say:
>
> "After I went to the post office, I went to the chemist's."
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 9:27 AM, Ph. D. <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> "John came. Afterwards Mary came."  Okay.
>> "John came. After that Mary came."  Okay.
>>
>> "John came. After, Mary came." This is the one which is strange. With the
>> proper pauses and intonation, I would understand this, but I don't think a
>> speaker of American English would say this.
>>
>> In your earlier example, I might say, "Let's do the next task.
>> Afterwards, you can have a smoke."
>>
>> --Ph. D. in the Midwest (Michigan)
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 8 Jul 2017 00:04:29 +0800, stewart fraser  wrote:
>>
>> A few of you North Americans are saying you find …
>>
>> “John came. Afterwards Mary came”
>> or “John came. After that Mary came”
>> or “John came. After, Mary came”
>>
>> … a bit strange. OK, if I was just giving a sequence of events I would
>> say “John came and then Mary came”. However if I had said “John came” and
>> had finished talking. Then I realized a further event happened that my
>> listener would also be interested in, I would continue “Afterwards Mary
>> came”
>>
>> Another time I would this construction would be when the second clause
>> was contrary to expectations. For example “it was a very dirty game of
>> football with 11 yellow cards given and two guys sent off, but after they
>> all went to the pub together and got along fine.
>>
>> How do you guys feel about this usage ?
>>
>>                                         … Stewart
>>
>>
>> > On Jul 7, 2017, at 11:26 PM, Gary Shannon  wrote:
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 8:23 AM, stewart fraser  wrote:
>> >
>> >>> That’s interesting Gary. Let me ask you another question.
>> >>>
>> >>> Let me build up the scene first … you are a painter and decorator
>> >> working with your helper at some sight. Now you both know that the next
>> >> task will take around 15 minutes and it is a two man job. Your helper
>> says
>> >> he is gasping for a cigarette. To put him off for a bit …
>> >>> could you say “after” ?
>> >>> could you say “afterwards” ?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ​
>> > I wouldn't use either word in isolation. I think I'd say "can you do
>> that
>> > later?", or "Wait till after we're done."
>> >
>> > --gary
>> >
>> > ​
>>
>
>