Newsgroup: it.cultura.linguistica.inglese
Titolo: Frase "Esiste un programma che ... ?"

Come si traduce in inglese "Esiste un programma (informatico)
che ... ?"
Va bene "Does a program (o software) exist that ... ?"?

 Va bene "Does a program (o software) exist that ... ?"?
Mi sembra innaturale. Cosa non va con "Is there a program which...?"

 Mi sembra innaturale. Cosa non va con "Is there a program which...?"
I'd say "Is there a software..."
-- 
SeanTorno

 I'd say "Is there a software..."
I hope you wouldn't. "a software" just sounds wrong. software is 
uncountable.

 wrote in message
news:461161a7$0$94379$7b0f...@mistral.news.newnet.co.uk...

If I had to use software, I might say "is there any software which...", but
I agree that "a software" just doesn't sound right, even though it may be
used by some people. The same goes for "hardware" and "firmware".
Joe from Massachusetts

 If I had to use software, I might say "is there any software which...", b
or "a piece of software", maybe

 wrote in message
news:46118bc7$0$19651$7b0f...@mistral.news.newnet.co.uk...

Yes, that would go well also.
Joe from Massachusetts

 Joe from Massachusetts
Molto interessante.
Tornando a "program", come vedete la frase "Does exist a program
that ... ?"?
Il problema è che in italiano mi suona più calzante "esiste un
programma che ... ?" rispetto a "c'è un programma che ... ?" per
esprimere la domanda se esiste questo programma *in generale,
nell'universo*, non cioè nel contesto o luogo particolare di cui si
sta (eventualmente) trattando.
Un esempio che rende meglio il concetto:
sono in un negozio di scarpe e sto provando un tipo di scarpa che mi
piace. Se chiedo al negoziante "c'è una scarpa come questa ma di
cuoio?" intendo usualmente chiedergli se ce ne ha come questa ma di
cuoio nel suo negozio, da farmi provare subito, mentre invece se gli
chiedo "esiste una scarpa come questa ma di cuoio?" intendo usualmente
chiedergli se esiste in generale, non necessariamente nel negozio da
provare subito.
La differenza è sottile e forse anche un po' soggettiva ma secondo me
nella prassi dell'uso interrogativo di "c'è" ed "esiste" esiste.

 that ... ?"?
Talmente brutta che mi strapperei il braccio sinistro e lo userei
per picchiarti a morte (usando il braccio destro, ovviamente).
Se proprio insisti, puoi dire "Does there exist a program which.."
ma non mi convince per niente. Ho visto questa struttura in alcuni 
contesti matematici, ma parlando della disponibilita' di un programma
mi sembra troppo formale.

 uncountable.
I agree, baso la mia affermazione su quel che sento in ufficio.
Potrebbe essere una forma abbeviata, molto colloquiale, di "is there a 
software program"? Che mi suona piu' corretta...
-- 
SeanTorno

 wrote in message
news:46128278$0$78519$7b0f...@mistral.news.newnet.co.uk...

Total agreement.
Joe from Massachusetts


Ok ok mi avete convinto :)
e tra "Is there a program which...?" o "Is there a program that...?"
qual è la migliore?

 wrote in message
news:1175635587....@n76g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------
Most often heard is probably "that", but I'll leave it to you to tell us
which is correct after you have perused the interesting criteria for
choosing between "which" and "that" located here:
http://newark.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Writing/t.html#that
By the way, the Rutgers University women's basketball team will be competing
for the US collegiate women's basketball championship this evening.
Joe from Massachusetts

 software program"? Che mi suona piu' corretta...
E chi direbbe "a software program"? Sei in un paese anglofono? Stento a 
crederci.

 
http://newark.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Writing/t.html#that
This "which" vs "that" stuff seems to be mostly a US-only thing.

 I agree, baso la mia affermazione su quel che sento in ufficio.
google search "five softwares" vs "five programs"



Lo dico io, ogni giorno.
-- 
Joey DoWop Dee
Remember: It is To Laugh



Absolutely.




Here again is (are) my two cents [worth].
(BTW this usage is mostly observed by highly anal-retentive Americans* and 
hardly no Brits. Even here in the US it's largely ignored nowadays, but to my 
ears its misuse always produces an illogical sentence.)
Is there a program *that* will reorganize my files?
Is there a program that will reorganize my files, which is something I sorely 
need to do.
This is the program (that) I bought. (that=>the program)
This is the program (that) I bought, which was hard for me to do because of 
the cost. (which=> (that) I bought the program.)
Don't dwell on it. I'll cringe if you use "which" when you *should* use 
"that" (the opposite doesn't usually happen) but I won't take you to task for 
it. I will just consider you number among hoi polloi. :-)
*I am one of maybe thirteen of us left. :-(
(But if Joe from MA can rag about how *not ever* to use the verb "to give" I 
can rag about "which/that.")


 
http://newark.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Writing/t.html#that
a very useful link, thank you
-- 
in questo mondo
contempliamo i fiori;
sotto, l'inferno

 it. I will just consider you number among hoi polloi. :-)
I don't think this distinction exists in British English. I see
nothing whatever
wrong with "This is the program which I bought" or "Is there a program
which
will do this?"

 This "which" vs "that" stuff seems to be mostly a US-only thing.
According to what I remember being taught, 'which' can be either restrictive
or non-restrictive, while 'that' can only be 'restrictive'. 
Does this rule conform to British usage?
Max

Madonna ragazzi... non fate in tempo a togliermi un dubbio che già me
ne mettete in testa un altro! perchè avete usato il futuro in queste
frasi?
- "Is there a program which will do this?"
- "Is there a program *that* will reorganize my files?"
In italiano in generale usiamo il presente o il congiuntivo, non il
futuro:
- "esiste un programma che fa questo?"
- "esiste un programma che riorganizzi i miei file?"
Davvero (in generale) in inglese dovrei usare il futuro?

 Davvero (in generale) in inglese dovrei usare il futuro?
Is there a program which opens .wombat files?
Is there a program which will open .wombat files?
Is there a program to open .wombat files?
Is there a program for opening .wombat files?
I think all of these are at least possible.

 crederci.
Irlanda.
-- 
SeanTorno

 Lo dico io, ogni giorno.
In quali contesti? Le mie altre fonti americane dicono "a software
program? cazzo dici?"


Eccellente. Ho in effetti usato tutte queste forme (tranne quella con
il futuro) per cui mi è di conforto sapere che sono tutte valide.



What would they propose instead? 


 "hardly no"?
Ouch! You got me there.


 What would they propose instead? 
a program



Of course, in the right context, "a program" would mean a software program. 
In many other contexts it would not.
I guess my point is that to call it "a software program" is certainly not 
incorrect, and in fact in some contexts it would make sense to do so.
I'm watching a program on the camouflage capabilities of the cuttlefish. They 
are amazing creatures. At a lecture I went to recently, the program included 
sessions with marine biologists whose work with these cephalopods advanced 
the theory of their high intelligence. These marine biologists have endorsed 
a program for the conservation of cephalopods in the far southern Pacific, an 
area where a decrease in their numbers has been noted recently.*
*Not factual; just to illustrate another instance where "a program" has 
nothing to do with software.
Also, "Get with the program" has nothing to do with software or computers.


 
No indeed. But again, there's no possible confusion here.



What can I say? It must be a US/UK difference. Google it.


 wrote in message
news:0001HW.C2387DDE...@news.verizon.net...

As that Rutgers source says:
"If the subtle difference between the two confuses you, use whatever sounds
right.
Other matters are more worthy of your attention."
Joe from Massachusetts



Yes, and the fact that my ears tremble should be of no concern to anyone but 
me.   :-)


 wrote in message
news:4613d09a$0$78517$7b0f...@mistral.news.newnet.co.uk...

I might use "a program", "an application", "software", "a software suite",
but  I wouldn't use "a software program", nor would any of the software,
hardware or firmware engineers or programmers I have worked with use it.
A similar situtation arises when describing "integrated circuits" (ICs) as
"solid state integrated circuits". Not all solid-state devices are
integrated circuits (a single transistor, for one), but all integrated
circuits are solid-state circuits, so the "solid state" modifier is an
unwieldy redundancy, and yet the phrase is still used.
Joe from Massachusetts



So then in your opinion a person would be wrong to use the expression "a 
software program."


 software program."
I don't think it's _wrong_. It seems conceivable if it's not obvious 
from context whether you mean scholarship program, conservation program, 
or what, but even then "computer program" would seem like the thing to say.
My recommendation to a non-native speaker would be to say "program"
(or "some software"), or "computer program" if absolutely necessary.
There are native English speakers who say all kinds of things that sound
odd to me. ("That wants eaten" or "That needs eaten" or some such thing,
"I do that any more") And this is fine and splendid. I would tend to
advise non-native speakers to say things another way.

 wrote in message
news:0001HW.C239CDAE...@news.verizon.net...

The English is correct, but the phrase is not used by people who work in the
industry. Having spent some time working in R&D in the electronics industry
in both software and hardware, I may be unduly prejudiced against the use of
the phrase.
Like the expression "solid state integrated circuit", which is perfectly
correct English, the redundancy may not be apparent to some, but among
people who work with ICs, the phrase would never be used.
In both cases, the phrases are used, but not by the people who work in the
field in question.
In the early days of the electronics industry, the word "condenser" was used
to describe a component which
stored an electical charge. The word was soon replaced by the word
''capacitor" in the electronics industry, but in the automotive industry,
the word ''condenser" survives, and is used to describe the ignition
capacitor in coil-and-distributor automotive ignition systems, and also to
describe the capacitors used in automotive ignition systems to prevent
radio-frequency interference. If I were working on an old car, and needed an
igntion capacitor, or an RFI capacitor, I would go to the automotive parts
distributor and ask for an igntion "condenser" or an RFI "condenser". That
is how the parts are listed in the automobile parts catalogs. However, if I
needed to replace a capacitor on a PC board in my computer, I would go to
the electronics store and ask for a "capacitor" of the correct value and
type, not a "condenser". If I asked for a "condenser" in an electronics
parts store, I would be met with a quizzical glance, and the clerk probably
wouldn't know what I was talking about.
No use of "condenser" or "capacitor" in either of these contexts can be
considered incorrect English. Each one has its place, and many people who
don't work on their own cars don't even know that the word "condenser"
exists as a synonym for "capacitor".
Joe from Massachusetts

 industry.
<Excuse the snip of a detailed response>
Except for me; I work in the industry. I work with end-users. Regular folks. 
Non-technical people, for whom the term is explanatory and illustrative.
That would be the distinction, then. For those working "in the industry" who 
don't want to sound like regular folks, maybe it should be avoided.
I doubt that any but the most critical technical people would call someone on 
the use of the expression in question.




Things like "That wants eaten ('eating' in the US)" and the other examples 
you cited *are* "_wrong_", but as I pointed out to Joe from MA, in my opinion 
only technical people would consider "software program" to be somewhat 
tautological, and hardly wrong.


 software program"? Che mi suona piu' corretta...
the OP was looking for a colloquial expression.


 
"a software" certainly isn't it, and I don't honestly think "a software
program" qualifies either. "a program" is not techie jargon.

 tautological, and hardly wrong.
It's not wrong the way "a software" is, sure. I think "a program" in 
normal use or "a computer program" in case of possible ambiguity seem
preferable.

 wrote in message
news:0001HW.C23A6CD3...@news.verizon.net...

Certainly there are different contexts where different people would use
different phrases. I am sure that in certain contexts '''RAM memory" and
"ROM memory" would be used instead of "RAM" and "ROM", despite the
redundancy. Some redundancies in technology-related phrases and acronyms are
universally used, such as "LCD display", "AC or DC current", "SMD device",
"CMOS semiconductor", "TTL logic", "GUI interface", "CAD design", and "DSL
line", while many others have not made such deep inroads into the everyday
language and are used differently in different contexts, and students of the
language should be aware that such differences exist.
Joe from Massachusetts

 Va bene "Does a program (o software) exist that ... ?"?
Si può dire:
Does a program exist...
Does software exist...
Does a software program exist..
Does an application exist...
Does a software application exist...
Nel campo di computer c`è una nuvola intorpidenda che fa parlare come robot, 
la gente. Per esempio, si sente la gente che dice "I want to learn the 
computer" o "I learned the Excel". Non voglio dire che è correct o che ti 
raccomando a dirlo, ma queste frasi si sentono spesso. Le parole 'program', 
'software', e 'application' sono generichi, usati in molte situazioni, e si 
sa dal contesto che cosa qualcuno vuole dire. Se si dice 'does a program 
exist' è neccessario il contesto per sapere che si parla di un programma 
informatico. Per questa ragione qualcuno può decidere a dire 'does a 
software program exist'. Insomma, non c`è un modo standard per dire un 
programma informatico, ma ci sono molti modi che sono accetti, come ho 
scritto prima. 

 any more" are mainstream.
I think you might mean "That wants eatin' (eating)"




Thanks, Tony. It's nice to know I'm not crazy.
(Or I'm not the only crazy one. :-)


 
No. People on ifmud have used it, and been surprised that others have
said "what?"



Hm. Never heard that type of expression with the past participle, but I have 
(relatively) often heard it with the present:
That wants washin(g).
That needs doin(g).
I don't know what imfud is, but if these are Americans *writing* things like 
"that wants eaten", I'll bet you a dollar they either don't know what they're 
writing or what they're saying.
Uneducated or simply careless people will write things like
"more then..." when they mean "more than..."
and
"seen as how" for "seeing as how"
and
"would of/could of/ should of" for "would've/could've/etc."
These *are* simply wrong and I would definitely so advise anyone learning the 
language.


 That needs doin(g).
I've tried to find internet examples, and the first hit I have is:
http://linguistlist.org/issues/4/4-669.html



Odd. My family hails from Pittsburgh. Never heard any of them use that 
structure.


 redundancy.
In italiano leggo quasi sempre "memoria RAM/ROM". Credo che perņ la tautologia 
in un'altra lingua sia quasi giustificata... 

 sembra più naturale qui]  'does a


 (Or I'm not the only crazy one. :-)
You both are not alone.
-- 
SeanTorno



Ebbe'; siamo in tre. Grazie.

 scritto prima.
-- 
"And the whole Earth was of one language, and of one speech". 
(Genesis 11,1)

> "Nuvola intorpidenda"?
Thank you, Enrico and mymo, for the corrections. I guess I'm no poet in 
Italian.

 "accettati"
Io 'accetti' lo lascerei. Non suona benissimo, e lo vedo usare soprattutto 
nell'espressioe 'ben accetto', ma penso che vada bene anche in altri contesti... 
giusto? 

Tony the Ice Man wrote:

L'italiano di quel messaggio era buono, Tony. C'erano solo dei piccoli errori di 
stile e di distrazione... ;-)