Newsgroup: it.cultura.linguistica.inglese
Titolo: Questa frase è corretta?

"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our
people, and neither do we their."
Ovvero una "correzione" fatta da un utente di un altro NG alla presunta
"gaffe" di Bush:
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our
people, and neither do we."
Quel "their" non mi convince... "stop thinking about new ways to harm" è
il verbo sottointeso del secondo periodo?
Saluti!
Raffaele



Please do yourself a favor: if you're trying to learn English -- even bad
English -- do NOT quote W. The man cannot construct a simple sentence by
himself.
"Families is where our nation finds hope, where wings take
dream."
—LaCrosse, Wis., Oct. 18, 2000
"Quotas are bad for America. It's not the way America is all
about."
"I mean, there needs to be a wholesale effort against racial
profiling, which is illiterate children."
—Second presidential debate, Oct. 11, 2000 (Thanks to Leonard Williams.)
"I think if you know what you believe, it makes it a lot easier to answer
questions. I can't answer your question." —In response to a question about
whether he wished he could take back any of his answers in the first
debate. Reynoldsburg, Ohio, Oct. 4, 2000 (Thanks to Peter Feld.) 
* * *
Source:
http://www.bushisms.com/index1a.html#List
We all know you can't believe everything you read on the Internet, but I've
seen these quotes so many times in so many places, I know they're real.
<sigh>
I could go on, but what's the point? He is quasi analfabeta.
-- 
If you feel the need to e-mail me, un-not my address first.

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 23:28:12 +0200, raffaele castagno wrote:

Penso che sia corretto, ma la frase non ha senso in ambo i casi. Senza
"their" significa che l'America non smette mai di pensare a nuovi modi di
danneggiarSI; con "their" significa che, se da un lato "they" non smettono
mai di pensare a nuovi modi di danneggiare l'America, l'America non smette
mai di pensare a nuovi modi di danneggiare i paesi di quelli là. Sia come
sia, non ha senso, spero.
Sbaglio, Joey?
Ciao, FB
-- 
L'importante è che risplenda tu, sola primadonna e immarcescibile leggenda
del tuo pianerottolo.
(Lucangel su it.cultura.libri)

 Sbaglio, Joey?
Non sbagli. Pure io non capisco nessun significato in quel periodo.
Ho appena passato qualche tempo girovagando sul site che ho già segnalato.
Non posso credere (nè capire) quel che ho letto.


 Sbaglio, Joey?
Beh, nel significato di "danneggiarSI" ha un senso. Se non penso a come
posso venire attaccato, non posso difendermi. Ma questa è strategia, non
inglese, ed in ogni caso non posso certo sapere cosa pensasse in quel
momento il cespuglio...
Comunque mi interessava solo sapere se la frase era corretta, tnx!
Raffaele
-- 
Raffaele Castagno
Per mandarmi una mail, rimuovere il SIGILLO.
questo articolo e` stato inviato via web dal servizio gratuito 
http://www.newsland.it/news
 segnala gli abusi ad 
ab...@newsland.it

 English -- do NOT quote W.
I'm sure Raffaele isn't trying to learn English out of Bush's quotes.
He was just curious as to whether the small change of adding 'their' is 
indeed acceptable as far as grammar goes. I am curious, as well. Shouldn't 
it be 'theirs' (pronoun), maybe?
Max

 himself.
Oh, yes... It would be like having Mr DiPietro for President
:-DDDDDD
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (
http://www.grisoft.com
).
Version: 6.0.740 / Virus Database: 494 - Release Date: 16/08/2004

 it be 'theirs' (pronoun), maybe?
Then it would mean that the Bush administration never stops thinking about
new ways to harm another country. I think I prefer that the sentence just
not make sense and leave it at that.

 non posso certo sapere cosa pensasse in quel momento il cespuglio...
1) Che c'è per cena?
2) I can read, I can read, I can read. (colonna sonora: "You can fly", da
"Peter Pan")
3) What in da hell is dis letter? The Alphabet can still amaze me.
Ciao, FB
-- 
"Gli americani sono ignoranti per loro stessa natura",
that is "The Americans are naturally ignorant"
(Paolo Bonardi's opinion on it.cultura.linguistica -
http://snipurl.com/7ryg
)

 3) What in da hell is dis letter? The Alphabet can still amaze me.
    3a) Or is it a number?




And that's really what I was trying to say. (Thanks, Tony.) The point is
that it should be "theirs" to make it *grammatically* correct, but is it
correct in any other way? Did the man really want to say that the US never
stops thinking about new ways to harm their country?  chissà... ma non ha
senso.


 senso.
Come gia detto, in generale "thinking about new ways to harm their
country" è una cosa strategicamente NECESSARIA. Ma non ci è dato sapere
cosa volesse esprimere il cespuglio in quel momento.
Grazie comunque!
Saluti


 cosa volesse esprimere il cespuglio in quel momento.
Indeed, both the proposed readings, yours (they must think of new ways to
harm their own country, so as to forestall the enemy's moves) and Giano's
(they must think of new ways to harm terrorists' countries and people), are
unlikely.
Should I choose one, I'd choose the former. The latter suggests the idea
that the US want to indiscriminately strike the countries and the people
terrorists belong to, which is supposedly not the idea Bush wanted to
convey, is it?
Max

 convey, is it?
I don't see a way of rewriting that sentence to say the former without
completely changing the sense of the currently written words. I think, given
the participants, you should assume little connection between the words and
actual policy. Some who want to influence people choose words to convey
charged emotional content, not information. In that sense, I believe that
one can say the sentence accurately reflects the internal processes and
ideology of the speaker.



Well the day is drawing to a close, but I have to intercede again, and
emphasize that (in my opinion, and the opinion of millions) there is no
point in trying to make sense of that sentence (and many others) uttered by
George W. Bush. I do agree that "the sentence accurately reflects the
internal processes and ideology (but I have a tough time using that word in
conjunction with W) of the speaker."
I'll repeat the link to one of the websites of Bushisms. (And then, having
said what I've said and provided the link, I'll go hang my embarrassed head
in shame.) (But not before the large Martini is mixed.)
http://www.bushisms.com/index1a.html


 by George W. Bush.
World is going to be ruled by a man whose sentences are not worth making 
sense of. A dreadful prospect, indeed. Are there any Vogon ships in the 
vicinity to hitch a lift on?
Max



Please don't make me any more depressed than I am already. There is an
election coming up in November. If that simian is re-elected, I will book
passage on anything...
I'm not sure about Vogon, but Venus sounds nice... especially this time of
year. :)


 year. :)
You haven't read The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, have you? The Vogons 
are among the most rude, callous and vile beings in the known universe. 
They also wrote some of the worst pieces of poetry ever known. :)
Max

 vicinity to hitch a lift on?
Bye, and thanks for all the fish.

     3a) Or is it a number?
 
		No, it ain't no number. It must be greater than ten, at least.
Bye, FB
-- 
Io ho deciso di rifiutarmi di vederlo: Ettore con la faccia di Eric Banana
mi fa venire i conati.
(commento sul film "Troy" apparso su it.fan.scrittori.tolkien)

 election coming up in November.
What are the odds for Kerry? I mean that if, on one hand, one of the two
candidates running for Presidency appears to be smarter, on the other hand
he has to be elected by the American people, and I understand Bush is still
much appreciated.
Bye, 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)

 Bye, FB
<OT>
My opinion: the race is very close, still.
My hope: that enough people will realize that Kerry would be better in so
many ways that it would be insane to re-elect W.
Also: that the Florida vote doesn't get stolen again.
</OT>


 Do you think Kerry will know who the prime minister of India is? :)
Yes, and I believe he'll be able to speak English at least as well as Dr.
Singh, unlike W, who was put to shame recently by King Abdullah of Jordan
who spoke English much more articulately than W.


 who spoke English much more articulately than W.
I know nothing about Kerry's command of the English language, but his
accent is pleasing even to a would-be Briton as myself.
Bye, FB


 Briton as myself.
E sua figlia parla bene italiano.
-- 
oggi no, domani sì

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 21:52:20 GMT, ADPUF wrote:

C'č solo un altro parametro, allora, in cui Kerry deve dimostrare il suo
valore: ha figlie o nipoti carine? Bush deve avere una nipote notevole, se
ben ricordo.
Ciao, FB
-- 
Nasalization is just a part of life.
(Joey DoWop Dee on it.cultura.linguistica.inglese)

 What are the odds for Kerry? I mean that if, on one hand, one of the two
Kerry? Quello che vuole aumentare di 50mila effettivi i ranghi
dell'esercito?
E poi, "saper parlare bene" non mi pare una caratteristica da mettere ai
primi posti nella scala di importanza, quando si tratta di scegliere un
leader...
Fine della polemica...
Raffaele


 leader...
Direi di sì... Bush, lo si vede, gioca sui luoghi comuni per fare leva
sulla gente comune. Kerry fa ragionamenti, Bush parla per slogan, per frasi
fatte. Ho l'impressione che ad alcuni americani non piaccia scoprire che il
loro paese, come tutti i paesi, non è perfetto.
Beh, visto che la polemica, del tutto pacifica, si è aperta, mi sfugge
perché Kerry sarebbe considerato un traditore perché ha denunciato ciò che
facevano (cert)i soldati americani in Vietnam. Questa proprio non la
capisco.
Ciao, FB
-- 
Se dico "siedi!" manca l'oggetto.
Siedo chi? Lei o me?
(da it.cultura.linguistica.italiano)

 Oh, yes... It would be like having Mr DiPietro for President
O, per dire, sarebbe come avere Berlusconi presidente del consiglio.
--
Cingar
P.S. Ovviamente si stanno facendo esempi un po' esagerati, solo per il gusto
di immaginare situazioni inverosimili. Figuriamoci se gli italiani son cosě
fessi da votare gente del genere! Ah ah ah! Ma ve l'immaginate, Berlusconi
presidente del consiglio? Ah ah ah! Capace che, quando gli fanno la foto
ricordo con gli altri capi di stato, quello fa le corna al tizio che gli sta
davanti... Capace che, quando riceve un capo di stato straniero, si presenta
vestito come un industrialotto tamarro in vacanza... Ah ah ah! A a a. U u
u... Mi viene da piangere, mi viene.
--------------------------------
Inviato via 
http://arianna.libero.it/usenet/

 loro paese, come tutti i paesi, non è perfetto.
It's the only way he knows how to speak. No country is perfect and it may
be a difficult thing to realize, but it's reality. The worst disillusion
here is that this man with no talents or abilities, an absolute troglodyte,
has become our "leader." He represents the American people. That, to me, is
an embarrassment and a dishonor; a shame.
With all due respect to the NG and with apologies for being (somewhat) OT,
I'd like to reproduce an article written by a Florida Republican who has
come to his senses regarding Bush. It is written, as you might assume, in
English, so it's not too terribly OT, I suppose.
Don't read any further if you're not interested.
***
Charlie Reese writes for the Orlando Sentinel. He is a conservative
Republican who is anti-abortion, anti-tax-and-spend, loudly critical of
legislation by the judiciary, doesn't think much of multi-culturalism or
secularism, has suggested Clinton "turned the Oval Office into a
whorehouse," thinks Ronald Reagan is the greatest thing to come down the
pike since canned beer, and voted for Bush in the last election.
 
However, have a look at this:
 
Vote For A Man, Not A Puppet
 
Americans should realize that if they vote for President Bush's
re-election, they are really voting for the architects of war - Dick
Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and the rest of that cabal of
neo-conservative ideologues and their corporate backers.
 
I have sadly come to the conclusion that President Bush is merely a
frontman, an empty suit, who is manipulated by the people in his
administration. Bush has the most dangerously simplistic view of the world
of any president in my memory.
 
It's no wonder the president avoids press conferences like the plague.
 
Take away his cue cards and he can barely talk. Americans should be
embarrassed that an Arab king (Abdullah of Jordan) spoke more fluently and
articulately in English than our own president at their joint press
conference recently.
 
John Kerry is at least an educated man, well-read, who knows how to think
and who knows that the world is a great deal more complex than Bush's
comic-book world of American heroes and foreign evildoers. It's unfortunate
that in our poorly educated country, Kerry's very intelligence and refusal
to adopt simplistic slogans might doom his presidential election efforts.
 
But Thomas Jefferson said it well, as he did so often, when he observed
that people who expect to be ignorant and free expect what never was and
never will be.
 
People who think of themselves as conservatives will really display their
stupidity, as I did in the last election, by voting for Bush. Bush is as
far from being a conservative as you can get. Well, he fooled me once, but
he won't fool me twice.
 
It is not at all conservative to balloon government spending, to vastly
increase the power of government, to show contempt for the Constitution and
the rule of law, or to tell people that foreign outsourcing of American
jobs is good for them, that giant fiscal and trade deficits don't matter,
and that people should not know what their government is doing. Bush is the
most prone-to-classify, the most secretive president in the 20th century.
His administration leans dangerously toward the authoritarian.
 
It's no wonder that the Justice Department has convicted a few
Arab-Americans of supporting terrorism. What would you do if you found
yourself arrested and a federal prosecutor whispers in your ear that either
you can plea-bargain this or the president will designate you an enemy
combatant and you'll be held incommunicado for the duration?
 
This election really is important, not only for domestic reasons, but
because Bush's foreign policy has been a dangerous disaster. He's almost
restarted the Cold War with Russia and the nuclear arms race. America is
not only hated in the Middle East, but it has few friends anywhere in the
world thanks to the arrogance and ineptness of the Bush administration.
Don't forget, a scientific poll of Europeans found us, Israel, North Korea
and Iran as the greatest threats to world peace.
 
I will swallow a lot of petty policy differences with Kerry to get a man in
the White House with brains enough not to blow up the world and us with it.
Go to Kerry's Web site (
www.johnkerry.com
) and read some of the magazine
profiles on him. You'll find that there is a great deal more to Kerry than
the GOP attack dogs would have you believe.
 
Besides, it would be fun to have a president who plays hockey, windsurfs,
rides motorcycles, plays the guitar, writes poetry and speaks French. It
would be good to have a man in the White House who has killed people face
to face. Killing people has a sobering effect on a man and dispels all
illusions about war.
</OT>


 dispels all illusions about war.
In effetti, Clinton e Bush jr non hanno fatto la guerra, 
non sanno che cos'è.
Anche in Europa i governanti attuali, per ovvie ragioni 
generazionali, non sanno che cos'è la guerra, non l'hanno 
vissuta di persona come combattenti. 
Forse solo Schroeder ha qualche esperienza, mi pare sia 
orfano di guerra.
Però qui la guerra l'hanno vissuta anche i civili, negli 
USA mai, e questo si vede, è un'esperienza che lascia 
ancora tracce.


 ah! A a a. U u u... Mi viene da piangere, mi viene.
Sarebbe come dare il premio Oscar a Roberto Benigni, te 
l'immagini? 
o come il premio Nobel a Dario Fo, assurdo!
