Newsgroup: it.cultura.linguistica.inglese
Titolo: Tradurre "con chi passerai il natale?"

Come in oggetto
grazie 1000

>From: "Paolo Bonanni"
Nel mio povero inglese americano direi:
who are you spending Christmas with?
ma se vuoi una traduzione piu' decente aspetta e vedi che ti dicono gli altri.
ari

Giò
A man has dreams of walking with giants,
to carve his niche in the edifice of time.
Before the mortar of his zeal
has a chance to congeal
the cup is dashed from his lips,
the flame is snuffed aborning.

 AFAIK la tua traduzione č perfetta.
Non sarebbe piů corretto:
Whom are you spending Chrstmas with?
Roger
-- 
"What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet." 

Whom are you spending Chrstmas with?
No. 
"Whom" è la "versione declinata" per i casi obliqui di "who", ma va
retta da qualcosa.
Se proprio vuoi usare whom (ma è una particella abbastanza desueta,
although it's good English) devi dire:
With whom are you spending Christmas?
Un esempio FAMOSISSIMO dell'uso di "whom" è il titolo di un
celeberrimo libro di Ernest Hemingway, ossia "Per chi suona la
campana".
In inglese è "For whom the bell tolls"
In inglese moderno forse sarebbe "Who the bell tolls for".
Ti faccio un esempio dell'uso:
Cercavo chi aveva comprato quell'auto
I was looking for those who had bought that car.
In questo caso il complemento è diretto, ci va "who".
Ti chiesi di chi fosse quella maglietta.
I asked you who that t-shirt belonged to
oppure
I asked you to whom that t-shirt belonged
in questo caso il caso è obliquo, non è diretto, se usiamo la
costruzione in cui non si mette alla fine la particella che regge il
complemento, bisogna declinare il "who" ed usare "whom".
Queste regole suppongo derivino dal tedesco, nel quale diversi casi
ancora sopravvivono. L'inglese moderno è in pratica indeclinato,
AFAIK. In pratica nell'inglese moderno il whom non si usa mai e, se si
usa, si fa automaticamente, senza dover star a scomodare questa strana
grammatica comparata che usa il concetto di "casi", mediandolo da
lingue come latino, russo, tedesco...


 Whom are you spending Chrstmas with?
Non credo nessuno lo direbbe. Trovi tutto qui:
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/%7Emyl/languagelog/archives/000777.html
Credo che, rispetto a "Whom are you spending your Christmas with", sia piů
probabile "With whom are you spending your Christmas", fermo restando che,
credo, chiunque direbbe "Who are you spending your Christmas with?",
compreso il linguista che ha scritto il pezzo che ti segnalo.
Ciao, FB
-- 
"Enjoying yourself, Elfine?"
"It's going to be such fun!"
"No, it's going to be amusing or diverting, not such fun, darling."
(Cold Comfort Farm, the film)

Giň


 fraseologico.
Non è un verbo fraseologico: è "to spend", "trascorrere", più un
complemento. Il fatto che la preposizione sia posta alla fine non cambia le
cose.
[...]
Ciao, FB
-- 
Mrs. Palmer, in her way, was equally angry. 'She was determined to drop his
acquaintance immediately, and she was very thankful that she had never been
acquainted with him at all'. (Jane Austen)

 ancora sopravvivono.
No.
In tedesco le regole concernenti la posizione delle singole parti della 
frase, così come quelle della loro declinazione sono molto più rigide di 
quelle dell'inglese.
Grazie comunque per le spiegazioni.
Ciao,
Roger 

Giň


cose.
I think whom are you spending your Christmas with and who are you spending your
Christmas with are both correct.  If the preposition is placed at the end of
the sentence, you have a choice.
In regard to whom, I'd like to say that contrary to popular belief, whom is
still used when the accusative case is required in the sentence and when the
speaker is an educated person(at least where I am).   Whom did you meet is a
good example.  I would never say who did you meet.
bye
ari

cose.
dico solo che i modi per vedere la stessa cosa sono due:
a) verbo fraseologico "to spend with" + oggetto
b) verbo "to spend", al quale aggiungi "with"
ammetto che il primo modo č desueto.


Christmas with are both correct.
Thanks God.
cheers,
Peltio
(in the 'Whom are you spending your xmas with' party)

 the sentence, you have a choice.
Thanks for the explanation. So:
Whom did you meet? ==> Right
Who did you meet? ==> Horrid?
Who were you talking to? ==> Right
Whom were you talking to? ==> Highly unlikely/never heard?
To whom were you talking? ==> Formal but plausible?
[...]
Bye, FB
-- 
"Golden orb... The golden orb... The golden orb..."


 ammetto che il primo modo è desueto.
Non capisco che intendi. Puoi dire "I spent an evening at the restaurant",
"I spent an evening on the roof", e "I spent an evening with my dad".
Perché dire che "to spend with" è un phrasal verb, quando la preposizione
non è necessaria al verbo (posso dire "I spent an evening at the
restaurant", dove "to spend" significa sempre "trascorrere") e non cambia
il significato del verbo, così come accade ai phrasal verb?
Ciao, FB
-- 
Just as I thought. Another test that could have cost us our lives, saved
only by the fact that I am enormously well-bred.
(Murder by Death)

 Whom were you talking to? ==> Highly unlikely/never heard?
Sorry. You say "Whom are you spending Christmas with?" is fine, so this
should be fine as well. Here's what Pullum writes about the usage of "whom"
nowadays.
QUOTE
(
http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/%7Emyl/languagelog/archives/000777.html
)
Do you find this confusing? I certainly hope so. Anyone who wasn't a bit
confused by this point couldn't have been paying attention. Things are in a
confused state. The form whom is dying. For lots of speakers it is really
only used right after a preposition in a relative clause (anyone to whom
this is confusing), and perhaps sometimes at the beginning of a relative
clause (those whom I have succeeded in confusing). It hardly occurs in
interrogatives at all (I looked for whom in a couple of months of my recent
email, mostly from fellow professors, and I didn't find a single example of
it in an interrogative).
UNQUOTE


Giņ


Giò


 To whom were you talking? ==> Formal but plausible?
A bit too formal for the US.
"Whom" is falling into disuse except for the most formal of situations and
mostly by purists.
The issue of "with whom" (and other prepositional phrases of the like) is
compounded because it would be unusual for anyone to say "Whom are you
spending Christmas with?"
Because the use of "whom" is formal, anyone using it would most likely say
"With whom..." rather than "Whom .... with." In any case, we consider this
formal (or British) usage and not common here.
When I am speaking with my mother-in-law, a retired English teacher, I am
likely to use "whom" but *only* then. :)
-- 
This is my opinion of modern, colloquial, *conversational* American
English. 
If you feel the need to e-mail me, un-not my address first.

 
Wrong :-)
I don't think anyone in the UK uses it any more in spoken English,
except maybe the occasional 90-year-old aristocrat.
It is still used in very formal writing, but that's all.
I was surprised to hear Arianna say: "Whom did you meet is a
good example.  I would never say who did you meet", and I was about to
say that Americans are evidently more formal than we are, but maybe it
depends where you come from.
-- 
Mary


I use it all the time, but you have to remember that I work in a school and my
job consists in creating material and exercises for our English teachers.  The
people I hang out with use whom and so do I.  These are the type of people
who'd say "It is I".  You would never hear "it's me" from any of these people. 
Bye
Ari

 vederlo.
Be', ma parlando di grammatica non posiamo vedere le cose come ci pare, 
o usare in maniera approssimativa una terminologia fatta apposta per 
essere la più precisa possibile.
Qualche definizione di 'phrasal verb':
American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language:
An English *verb complex* consisting of a verb and one or more following 
particles and acting as a *complete syntactic and semantic unit*.
Compact Oxford English Dictionary:
An *idiomatic phrase* consisting of a verb and an adverb or preposition, 
as in break down or see to.
Encarta:
a verb followed by an adverb, a preposition, or both, used with an 
*idiomatic meaning* that is often quite different from the literal 
meaning of the individual words.
Infoplease:
a combination of verb and one or more adverbial or prepositional 
particles, as catch on, take off, bring up, or put up with, functioning 
as a *single semantic unit* and often having an idiomatic meaning that 
could not be predicted from the meanings of the individual parts.
Glossary of English Grammar Terms:
A phrasal verb consists of a verb and a preposition or adverb that 
modifies or changes the meaning; 'give up' is a phrasal verb that means 
'stop doing' something, which is very different from 'give'.
Ciao,
Anna

except maybe the occasional 90-year-old aristocrat.
I use it. I say things like "To whom should I send the replacement
parts?" at work all the time.
-- 
Adam Atkinson (
gh...@mistral.co.uk
)
EXAKCIP

Giņ
