Newsgroup: it.cultura.linguistica.inglese
Titolo: errori (forse) tipici degli italiani che parlano inglese, e domanda su di essi

Giň
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.


Yes , or , of course, 'Afterwards'
Mike 

Yes , or , of course, 'Afterwards'
Yes, it's just now coming to my head:
"[..] 
and afterwards we drop into a quiet little place a drink or two...
and then I go and spoil it all by saying something stupid like 'I love
you' 
[..]"


 coordinate.
Sì, ma evidentemente la frase è più naturale così. Puoi certamente usare
"as" o "since", la frase risultando più elaborata, più pensata (i.e. magari
al telefono non ti viene spontanea). "Because" si sente, ma credo sia
sgrammaticato. Ho sentito cose quali: "because this film..., does it... ?",
ma non _credo_ sia strettamente corretto, facendo il paio con il
colloquiale "just because..., doesn't mean that...".
[...]
Ciao, FB
-- 
"The doctors found out that Bunbury could not live, that is what I mean—so
Bunbury died."
"He seems to have had great confidence in the opinion of his physicians."
("The Importance of Being Earnest", Oscar Wilde)

 un "since" o un "as", o cmq qualcos'altro di diverso dal "because".
'As I'm busy today' is fine, but also rather formal and weak.

> Yes, it's just now coming to my head:
Per l'espressione idiomatica, si dice 'mind' invece di 'head,' "It's just 
now coming to mind". 

 use of 'since' to mean 'because' instead of 'between then and now'.
Are there? I've always thought it's fine. I'll peruse the SOED at once.
[...]
Bye, FB
-- 
"Gli americani sono ignoranti per loro stessa natura",
that is "Americans are naturally ignorant"
(Paolo Bonardi's opinion - it.cultura.linguistica -
http://snipurl.com/7ryg
)
More? 
http://snipurl.com/c92q

 use of 'since' to mean 'because' instead of 'between then and now'.
"Due to" and "owing to" would be certainly wrong in this case, even though
I seem to recall that Fowler wrote he had found it in a Queen's speech.
Bye, FB
-- 
Nasalization is just a part of life.
(Joey DoWop Dee on it.cultura.linguistica.inglese)

 Are there? I've always thought it's fine. I'll peruse the SOED at once.
QUOTE (The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary)
[...]
B. conjunction.
[...]
II.  4. Because, seeing that. Formerly also foll. by that. LME.
 
Ellis Peters "Cadfael did not..ask, since he was about to be told."  
[...]
UNQUOTE
Bye, FB
-- 
Locked from the inside. That can only mean one thing, and I don't know what
it is.
(Murder by Death)

 Ellis Peters "Cadfael did not..ask, since he was about to be told."
Excuse my directness but, so what? There are instances where the use of
'since' to mean 'because' can be unclear. For this reason and perhaps
others, some purists choose to reject entirely this usage.
For example: "Since the boss went on vacation, work has slowed down at the
factory". Does this mean that work has slowed down at the factory because
the boss went on vacation or does it mean that work has slowed down between
the time when the boss went on vacation and now for some unrelated reason?

Giò


Giò


 the time when the boss went on vacation and now for some unrelated reason?
I see. Of course, one should avoid misunderstandings, in every language,
but the use of "since" meaning "given that" is not wrong in itself, is it,
and misunderstandings don't happen all the time, do they.
Bye, FB
-- 
"While I'm here, might I make a few changes? I adore my bedroom, but do you
think I could have my curtains washed? I believe they're red, but I should
like to make sure."
(Cold Comfort Farm, the film)

 inclination to dissuade you.
Oops, my apologies. I was doing two things at once and I mistakenly thought
the author of your post was someone else. It wasn't you who had decided that
beginning a sentence with 'because' was wrong and I haven't noticed any
pronounced enthusiasm for predilections on your part.

 and misunderstandings don't happen all the time, do they.
I don't consider it wrong if the meaning is clear. I was just pointing out


 "You go to my head" ?
E  anche 'Can't Get You Out of My Head', ma preferisco 'How Can I Miss You
If You Won't Go Away?'

 pronounced enthusiasm for predilections on your part.
Well, I did say it was "sgrammaticato", but common. Is it perfectly fine as
far as grammar goes?
Bye, FB
-- 
<<"Plano su di lei come un paradiseo imbottito di Taurus... Faccio guizzare
la lingua come un pitone ubriaco". Prendo questo libro, lo butto nel
cestino.>>
(Recensione di Antonio D'Orrico sul Corriere della Sera Magazine)

 correct English, quale penso non sia :-)
Mi interesserebbe sapere la regola grammatica in cui dice che è un errore.

 as far as grammar goes?
I'm not aware of any rule of grammar that forbids such usage. It may sound 
awkward at times, but part of the reason may be because the dependent clause 
is at the beginning of the sentence. For example it sounds better to say: 
'What about seeing each other next Tuesday, because today I'm busy.'

 the time when the boss went on vacation and now for some unrelated reason?
In BrE there could be no ambiguity in a sentence like that.
"Since the boss went on vacation..." could only mean "da quando il capo
è andato in vacanza...".
If the meaning were "siccome il capo...", the English version would be
"Since the boss has gone on vacation".
-- 
Mary

 "You go to my head" ?
Ha un significato diverso; non "mi vieni in mente" bensì "mi fai girare
la testa".
-- 
Mary

 coordinate.
The latter statement is true , but substituting normal usage for what is 
impossible or unlikely is not an impoverishment of the language ! Let me 
rephrase myself : here are the three versions suggested :-
Because today I'm busy , what about seeing each other next Tuesday ?
As today I'm busy  , what about seeing each other next Tuesday ?
Since today I'm busy , what about seeing each other next Tuesday ?
All three are grammatically OK , of course ; but I'd say no Englishman would 
ever say the first ;  the second is almost as unlikely ; the third is more 
possible , and certainly doesn't sound as awkward as the first two , but 
what almost all Englishman in this context would say is 'I'm busy today , so 
what about...' or 'I'm busy today , but what about ...'
- and I say all this as one of the subordinate clause's most committed fans 
!
Mike 

 coordinate.
 
Ma come ti permetti, scusa?
L'inglese non è l'italiano. 
L'italiano, più è aulico, più è considerato bello.
L'inglese è proprio il contrario; la semplicità è un pregio, non un
difetto.
-- 
Mary

 "Since the boss has gone on vacation".
I was about to write the same thing. Really! I was!!


la testa".
Ah. Only now, at the end, do I understand. (semicit.)
grazie
ps "mi dai alla testa"?


- and I say all this as one of the subordinate clause's most committed fans 
sě, sono conscio del fatto che l'inglese č meno "ciceroniano"
dell'italiano, almeno nei normali contesti.
perň io non sono inglese, e voglio esprimermi in inglese con lo stile
che mi piace.


Giò


Giņ


 girigori inutili.
Quello va anche bene quando parli/scrivi in italiano, ma non ha senso
quando usi l'inglese. Se lo fai, non lo parlerai mai bene.
Come soleva dire il mio prof di musica, "you have to learn the rules
before you can break them".
-- 
Mary

Giň


 before you can break them".
It's funnier, to boot.
Bye, FB
-- 
"Oh oh... Oh my God! My parents are having an affair."
(Gilmore Girls - 512)

 wrote in message 
news:38elgnF...@individual.net...

Because I didn't read the whole thread first , I've partly commented on this 
already . As you see , and as Tony says , it's perfectly correct to begin a 
sentence with 'because' . The question here is simply one of usage , and not 
just of relative formality either  : 'Because I'm busy today , what about 
seeing each other next Tuesday?' is a sentence I am convinced no Englishman 
would ever utter .
Mike 

 would ever utter .
Since usage makes grammar, rather than the opposite, why is it correct
(i.e. idiomatic, common) to say "Because I'm busy today, what about... ?"
when you admit no Englishman would ever utter it? Do you imply that an
American would, or that such usage is correct on paper only? But, again,
usage makes grammar, so something which a native speaker would never say
can't be correct, can it? I don't doubt it's correct, since you and Tony
say so, but I don't see why.
Sorry if I seem inquisitive. Not that I'm not, mind you. (smiling face) 
Bye, FB
-- 
"What meaning of this, Mitter Twain?" "I will tell you, Mr Wang, if you can
tell me why a man who possesses one of the most brilliant minds of this
century can't say his prepositions or articles"
(Murder by Death)

 estremamente maleducato.
As I'm aware of your excellent skills in Italian I'm sure you meant to say
"un intervento" instead of "una battuta",
otherwise you'd have written "A me è sembrata una battuta estremamente
maleducata."
But I also have to warn you that was not a discourteous answer so if you
ever come across it again don't worry
that much, that's not offensive at all.
Maybe he could have chosen softer words but...


Well , let me pass on the exact relationship between grammar and usage , but 
you must admit you're pushing it by defining 'correct' as 'idiomatic' or 
'common' ; many writers use language which is indubitably 'correct' but 
which few would describe as 'idiomatic' or 'common' . Have you ever heard 
anyone speak in the style of the late Henry James ? When did you last speak 
with anyone who used sentences like some of those in Proust (e.g. about 53 
lines long - I once counted one) ? The language of Milton's epics is in many 
respects notoriously unidiomatic . When we have dealings with foreigners 
speaking our own language , don't we often find ourselves saying , 'Well , 
strictly speaking that's correct as far as the rules go , but we'd never say 
that' ?
To the case in point : 'because' is a conjunction ; it is perfectly correct 
to begin a sentence with a subordinate clause introduced by a conjunction ; 
there is no grammatical rule which distinguishes 'because' from other 
conjunctions in this respect ; so it is perfectly correct (as far as the 
rules of grammar go) to begin a sentence with 'because' .
However , the fact remains that 'Because I'm busy today , what about seeing 
each other next Tuesday' is not a sentence I can imagine any Englishman 
saying (or , I suspect , any American) ; but this fact doesn't imply in 
general that it's incorrect to begin a sentence with 'because' , as my 
sentence 'Because I didn't read the whole thread , I've partly commented on 
this already' illustrated .
Most non-expert people , like me , simply use 'correct' in this context as 
shorthand for 'according to the general rules of grammar ' ; these rules 
certainly don't cover thousands of unique usages , so we find no difficulty 
is saying that something is 'correct' , but would never be said ( i.e. is an 
incorrect usage , despite being apparently permitted by the rules of 
grammar) .
If you ask me to explain why the 'Because I'm busy' sentence is wrong , 
nescio - sed fieri sentio (as one of your illustrious literary ancestors put 
it , in response to a more urgent paradox) .
Mike 

 ciceroniano. Solo che sono rari.
Il periodo di Dickens non finisce più!
:-)))
Sarò strambo io, ma a me sembra che il Carletto Dickens (non traduco il suo
cognome per pudore :-)) abbia un po' imitato lo stile del Boccaccio, che
quando iniziava a scrivere un periodo, non finiva più, mettendo molto spesso
la proposizione principale dopo una valanga di subordinate, come per altro
faceva il caro Chichero.
Tschüss,
Enrico il Pentolaio
-- 
visita il mio sito: (
http://members.xoom.it/srw
)
_____________________________________
"L'animo umano e' fin troppo pronto a scusare le proprie colpe." (Livio)

faceva il caro Chichero.
Tutti hanno imitato, direttamente o indirettamente, Petrarca,
Boccaccio, Dante.


 this already' illustrated .
Was your sentence idiomatic? I mean, is the "because..." structure ever
correct _and_ idiomatic (meaning "given that", of course)?
[...]
Bye, FB
-- 
"Enjoying yourself, Elfine?"
"It's going to be such fun!"
"No, it's going to be amusing or diverting, not such fun, darling."



You might be on to something here - because 'because' and 'given that' 
aren't , in fact , interchangeable : 'Given that I didn't read the whole 
thread , I've partly commented on this already' doesn't mean the same as 
'Because I didn't etc.' , and indeed probably doesn't have any intelligible 
meaning ; whereas 'Given that I'm busy today , what about seeing each other 
next Tuesday?'  would certainly be feasible (when 'Because' isn't) , though 
it would imply a slightly different conversational antecedent to the other 
version I suggested .
The grammatical status of 'given' , in this usage , is rather odd , tho' ...
Mike

 Boccaccio, Dante.
E allora, invece di guardare i dvd in inglese, sarebbe meglio che ci
leggessimo tutti la Vita Nuova, il Convivio, la Commedia, il De Vulgari
Eloquentia, il De Monarchia, il Canzoniere, il Secretum, il De Vita
Solitaria, le Raccolte Epistolari (Familiares e Seniles), il Decameron, il
Filocolo ed il Filostrato.
:-))


 The grammatical status of 'given' , in this usage , is rather odd , tho' ...
Perhaps I see now. "Because"'s unsuitableness may be due to mere logic. If
I understand, "because..." can mean "because of the fact that...", so it
seems obvious that "because of tha fact that..." and "given the fact
that..." mean two different things, and are not interchangeable. Let's see
if I've understood:
"Because (not "given that") John didn't wake up in time, he never showed
up"
"Because (or "given that") the streets are impassable, we're bound to stay
here till Friday"
"Given that (not "because") you can't afford a new car, buying it was ([1])
a folly"
"Given that (or "because") he was very tired, he stayed home"
Tony has written that this use of "because" is informal. Very much so?
[1] On another note, would "has been" suit?
Bye, FB
-- 
"Come, dear, we have already missed five, if not six, trains. To miss any
more might expose us to comment on the platform."
("The Importance of Being Earnest", Oscar Wilde)


No . I'm not sure that Tony did say this (sorry if I've misunderstood , 
Tony) ; he was only discussing the original sentence , and I think comparing 
the relative formality of various alternative expressions , some of which in 
themselves may have a more formal ring than 'because' . However , I think 
that in the original sentence , in its conversational context , it would in 
fact sound (over-) formal to begin with the 'because' clause ; tho' my 
specific objection to the original was not that it was too formal , but that 
it was wrong .
You rarely hear the structure 'Because ..., Main Clause' in conversation 
(except with certain intonations/intentions which it would be tedious to try 
to spell out) , but it's perfectly normal in the relatively more formal 
context of written English ; it's true , of course , that putting the 
'because' clause after the main clause is much more common ; putting it 
first would be a purposeful stylistic choice , and alternatives such as 
'since' or 'as' might be preferred .
Mike 

 context of written English ;
Probably because you usually convey the main idea first and then, if
necessary, enlarge on details: 
- Can you come along?
- I can't because I have an important meeting.
is more natural than
- Because I have an important meeting, I can't.
the latter version sounding more pondered, prepared.
By the way, whilst I was leafing through "Rediscover Grammar" by David
Crystal, to answer a request on this newsgroup, I came across this
sentence:
QUOTE ("Rediscover Grammar", David Crystal, p.17)
*Speech and writing*
[...]
<about speech>
*S3* Because participants are typically in face-to-face interaction, they
can rely on such cues as facial expression and gesture to aid meaning
(feedback). The lexicon of speech is often characteristically vague, using
words which refer directly to the situation (*deictic* expression, such as
/that one/, /in here/, /right now/).
[...]
UNQUOTE
If I do understand now, "given that" would have been acceptable. 
Bye, FB
-- 
In any case, if you say 'I gotta go' at an important job interview you're
contributing to being allowed just that privilege.
(Tony the ice man on it.cultura.linguistica.inglese)

 If I do understand now, "given that" would have been acceptable.
Yes, but formal.