Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 17 Jan 2000 18:59:18 +0530
From:      Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>
To:        freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Non-native English (was: cvs commit: src/share/man/man5 sysctl.conf.5)
Message-ID:  <20000117185918.C368@mojave.worldwide.lemis.com>
In-Reply-To: <200001170736.IAA99539@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de>; from olli@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de on Mon, Jan 17, 2000 at 08:36:24AM %2B0100
References:  <85ta0f$1fkh$1@atlantis.rz.tu-clausthal.de> <200001170736.IAA99539@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday, 17 January 2000 at  8:36:24 +0100, Oliver Fromme wrote:
> G. Adam Stanislav <redprince@redprince.net> wrote in list.freebsd-chat:
>> At 09:31 16-01-2000 -0800, Eugene M. Kim wrote:
>>> No, they (including me and my friends) are not confused if contractions
>>> aren't used.  In almost all English classes (as a second language) they
>>> first teach `you are' then explain briefly about its contracted form
>>> `you're', not the opposite way.
>>
>> FWIW, as a native Slovak speaker who studied English in Slovakia, I was
>> taught to use contractions in spoken English, while the full form in
>> written English.
>
> I'm German, and learned English as 2nd language at school.  We
> learned both forms ``you are'' and ``you're'' etc. at about the
> same time, at the very beginning.

This confirms my suspicion.  You and Adam are the only two non-native
English speakers on this thread, and you both confirm that the
contractions are no source of confusion.

> We were taught that the non-contracted form is often used to
> indicate emphasis, or to stress that part of the sentence.
> I.e. ``You are'' is more emphasized and "stronger" than the
> contracted form ``you're''.  Compare the following two
> conversations:
>
> 1.  A: ``Where am I?''
>     B: ``You're at the airport.''
>
> 2.  A: ``How do I get to the airport?''
>     B: ``You _are_ at the airport.''

Good example.

> The sentence of person B is the same, except for emphasis and
> accentuation.  (I've aded underscores to indicate this.)  In the
> second conversation, it is not possible to use the contracted form
> without breaking the emphasis.  Although the the non-contracted form
> could have been used in the first example, but I think that's not
> very common.

Agreed.

> But then again, I'm not a native English speaker, and maybe my
> English teachers and books were clueless.  :-)

I've seen some evidence of this in Germany, but these examples are
fine.

Greg
--
Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000117185918.C368>