Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 02:07:33 -0400 From: Tim Vanderhoek <t.vanderhoek@utoronto.ca> To: Andi Scharfstein <nullpointer@myrealbox.com> Cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: grammar Message-ID: <20030601060733.GA31655@turquoise> In-Reply-To: <152193951140.20030601041329@myrealbox.com> References: <3ECD3A8C.1040506@potentialtech.com> <00ae01c32668$2ff5ad70$2441d5cc@nitanjared> <20030531072026.O33085@welearn.com.au> <20030530213625.GA41089@wopr.caltech.edu> <20030531080645.Q33085@welearn.com.au> <qvsmqvnjtq.mqv@localhost.localdomain> <20030601113948.G33085@welearn.com.au> <152193951140.20030601041329@myrealbox.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 04:13:29AM +0200, Andi Scharfstein wrote:
[...]
> encountering this thread. I also spoke with a few people today, two of
> which had spent a year in the US. They all agreed that the meaning of
> "In case X, do Y" (that's what I asked, verbatim) was "If X occurs, do
> Y", so it's not just me.
You need to be careful how you ask that question. I, as a native North
American English speaker, would have to accept both meanings as almost
equally valid. However, depending on how you asked the question, I
might not give that as my answer...
The "In case of ..." construct usually means "If ..., then ...".
If you first seeded the conversation by giving an example of "In case
of ...", then I would probably not notice any distinction between
the "In case of ..." and the "In case ..." (unless you really pressed
the point).
If you first seeded the conversation by giving an example such
as "Keep a fire extinguisher by the stove in case there is a fire" and
then asked me to distinguish between "In case of ..." and "In case ...",
then I would probably give you a perplexed look, think for a couple
minutes, and then give you the answer from my first paragraph.
I would accept the following two sentences as equally idiomatic
and semantically equivalent:
(1) In case there is an explosion, call the police.
(2) In case of an explosion, call the police.
But I would also accept the following two sentences as equally idiomatic
and semantically equivalent:
(3) In case there is an explosion, call the police.
(4) Call the police in case there is an explosion.
Unless you took pains to explain it to me, it would be a while until
I realized that (1) and (2) aren't exactly semantically equivalent
due to the ambiguity in (1). Similarly for (3) and (4) with the
ambiguity in (3).
In the absence at all of any context or semantic interpretation, I would
tend slightly towards Sue's point of view and slightly agree with her. But
I wouldn't call either usage much more idiomatic than the other.
English is kinda neat in that you can mix the phrases around in almost
any order and still have a semantically equivalent sentence:
(5) By the stove keep a fire extinguisher in case there is a fire.
(6) Keep a fire extinguisher by the stove in case there is a fire.
(7) In case there is a fire, keep a fire extinguisher by the stove.
(8) In case there is a fire, by the stove keep a fire extinguisher.
Of course, (5) and (8) are less idiomatic, but I will accept them in
everyday speach.
The "In case ..." meaning "If ..., then ..." must be kept at the
start of the sentence.
(9) In case she starts choking, give her the Heimlech maneouver.
(10) In case of her chocking, give her the Heimlech maneouver.
(11) *Give her the Heimlech meaneouver in case she starts choking.
(12) *Give her the Heimlech maneouver in case of her choking.
The sentence (11) and (12) do really parlay the desired meaning. I guess
I might accept (11) in everyday speech, even though I marked it with
an asterisk. I'm pretty sure that I would not accept (12) in everyday
speech. You could convince to accept (11), though, so maybe an
asterisk there isn't appropriate. Hmm.... Ya, the more I think about
it... Even in this case (11) is possibly acceptable and definitely
ambiguous. Only (12) would not be acceptable to me in either collequial
speech or formal writing.
It can get trickier.
(13) In the case that you run out of memory, do not run all your
programs at once.
(14) In case of you running out of memory, do not run all your
programs at once.
(15) In case that you run out of memory, do not run all your
programs at once.
The sentence (13) is unambiguously an "If ..., then ..." meaning. The
sentence (14) is ambiguous. However, (14) is not very idiomatic,
so perhaps it's unfair to include it here. And (15) is almost an
unambiguous precautionary meaning.
NOTE that the only difference between (13) and (15) is an extra
qualifier before "case" to prevent it from being indeterminate.
Of course, taking (15) and swapping "So" in place of "In case" makes
it less wordy, more idiomatic (in collequial speech, anyways), and
completely unambiguous.
Mind you, the "that" in (15) is yucky, since the word "that" can be
inserted almost anywhere into speech and has almost no useful semantic
meaning. In this case, I think (that) it does bias the sentence slightly
further towards a precautionary meaning, though.
In case that my head starts to hurt, I will now stop thinking and
writing about this. ;-)
In the case that my head starts to hurt, I will definitely stop
thinking and writing about this.
--
There are two types of tasks in life: those which become less urgent
as time passes, and those which become more urgent. Rotating one's
.signature file is a task of the latter type.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030601060733.GA31655>