Newsgroup: it.cultura.linguistica.inglese
Titolo: controllare questa frase

Giò
How do you expect me to grow, if you don't let me blow?
(Rachel a Ross, Friends 2x19)


I think it's "whether the sand treatment (that was) prescribed for
him."
*That was* e' sottinteso e "prescribed" e' il participio passato non
simple past.  Nella tua frase prescribed e' simple past.
BTW, in AIDS all the letters are usually capitalized.  
bye
ari

 capisce.
"Prescrittogli".
Ciao, FB
-- 
"Melissa [P.] spazzola Thomas Fazi"
(notizia apparsa su it.cultura.libri)

BTW, in AIDS all the letters are usually capitalized.  
dillo a BBC World...


"Prescrittogli".
allora perché non è "to him"?


 allora perché non è "to him"?
Non è una cosa strana che manchi "to".
Ciao, FB
-- 
Nasalization is just a part of life.
(Joey DoWop Dee on it.cultura.linguistica.inglese)

Non è una cosa strana che manchi "to".
manca nel senso che ci andrebbe ma non ci sta, o nel senso che non ci
va proprio?
ps essi chiaro


 ps essi chiaro
"The doctor prescribed him a sand treatment". I suppose it can be said, and
the same can be done with other verbs, like "to tell"; it can't with some
verbs, like "to explain" (I don't know why).
Ciao, FB
-- 
"Observe, Lord Burghley: I am married: to England."
(Elizabeth)

verbs, like "to explain" (I don't know why).
questo ce lo sapevo, e l'avevo anche scritto a gcarrera.
solo che in questo caso l'oggetto della cosa prescritta è espresso
(sand treatment), ed è anticipato, quindi l'oggetto della persona alla
quale viene prescritto come va espresso?
secondo me, appurato ceh "prescriped" è participio passato
aggettivante:
"An Aids patient asks his doctor whether 
the sand treatment prescribed to him 
will do any good. "
Per farti capire:
"The patient asks his doctor whether
the thing told to him
will suffice."
In italiano
"Un paziente chiede al suo dottore se
la cura prescrittaGLI (ossia prescritta A LUI)
sarà sufficiente"
Capisc?


 [...] Gli è che degli inglesi affamati mi hanno chiesto di preparare un
risotto per un centinaio di persone. [...] pericoli? [...]
Che la pentola ti cada addosso sotterrandoti. (sai che speciale di Studio
Aperto che viene fuori)
(Dott. Vernes su it.hobby.cucina)


Yes , 'him' is the Indirect Object , and 'treatment'  the Direct Object of 
'prescribed' . But it's not surprising Giò is asking questions , because 
'prescribe' (in this sense) is unusual :
 in almost all cases the indirect object can also be expressed using 'to' 
(e.g. 'He gave me a cigar and Jane a book', 'To me he gave a cigar , and to 
Jane a book') , whereas with 'prescribe' it has to be 'for' ; I can't 
offhand think of any other example of this . (Note also that 'for' may 
introduce the condition to cure which the treatment is prescribed : 'She 
prescribed him pain-killers for his arthritis')
You're probably familiar with that odd quirk of English by which the 
Indirect Object can become the subject of the verb in the Passive - e.g. 'I 
was given a cigar' ; and this applies to 'prescribe' too : 'I was prescribed 
a course of antibiotics for my infection.'
Mike

'prescribe' (in this sense) is unusual :
[...]
I didn't understand the eventual answer for what I asked for.
* I mean: in that case is "told" an adjective bound with "the thing"?
or is it that the subject (he, the doctor) is understood?
* bringing forward the object (the cure) doesn't change the way the
other object (the person the cure is for) is bound with the verb?
e.g. : I told you that. -> I told that to you (I brought forward the
"that", I had to use the "to")
So, I think it could have been:
An Aids patient asks his doctor whether the sand treatment he
prescribed to him will do any good.
(note the HE and the TO added, differently from the original sentence)
is it correct?
I really now can begin to figure the sentence with a "prescribed" used
as an adjective, in a way that what follows is "unaware" of the object
(the treatment) already said in advance, and is aware that the "him"
is like the first object to be bound to the construct "prescribed
someone something".
I can reach it with reason, but I've never would have said it like
that. of course I am just me :-)
ciao


Enas Kwizach Haderach akoma pio apotelesmatikos! wrote:

I can't explain it to you grammatically, but I think I said that that's
the way I would have phrased the sentence, except that I would have
used "for" instead of "to" and I think Mike told you the same thing in
regard to the preposition.
Ari

regard to the preposition.
so you wouldn't have put the direct object (provided him) anyway,
right?


 offhand think of any other example of this .
Yes. As far as I understand, doubble-object structures are possibile under 
two circumstances:
 1.  sencences with some verbs, like 'tell', 'send', 'bring', etc. 
     (but not, e.g.,  'understand' or 'say'), which support construction
        V NP to NP
 2. sentences with verbs supporting construction
      V NP for NP 
Examples of the latter are:
       I made a cake for John / I made John a cake
       I bought a car for him / I bought him a car
I, too, am inclined to think that the example at issue belongs to this 
group rather than to the former. 
Max
 
 

 
I wrote "understand" but I meant "explain".
Max

 right?
I don't understand the statement above.  What do you mean by "provided
him"?
I said that I would have used a preposition in front of "him" and that
preposition is "for"  I would have said "for him".    I said it sounded
a little strange (again in my post dated 8/13) I don't think I ever
heard "she prescribed him" or "he prescribed her" or "they prescirbed
you"....etc.  I've always heard it with the preposition "for".
bye
ari

you"....etc.  I've always heard it with the preposition "for".
wait a minute. You haven't heard the _verb_ used like: "he prescribed
him", or you haven't heard the _adjective_ (past participle) used like
"the things prescribed him" (cfr the original sentence up above)?
what a mess..


 wrote in message 
news:1124122645.3...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

As ari says , except that  'she prescribed him sg.' is an everyday usage in 
the UK .
'I told you that - I told that to you .'
'I prescribed him that - I prescribed that for him.'
So in the original , 'prescribed' is indeed a past participle used as an 
adjective - 'prescrittogli' , but the 'gli' has to be translated  as 'for 
him' , not 'to him' ; that's just the way it is , and Max's post gives other 
examples .
Mike 

 wrote in message 
news:ddq420$ck8$1...@newsreader.mailgate.org...

Yes - I couldn't think of other examples as I posted , but you're right , 
they're not that uncommon . One or two occurred to me since , e.g. 'I have 
reserved you a seat in the non-smoking area' , i.e. 'reserved a seat for 
you'.
Mike