placement of the before-clause
Ray
I was wondering about whether the placement of the before-clause makes
a difference in its interpretation relative to the rest of the clause.
Is there any difference in meaning between the 1st and the 2nd
sentences below?
1. John didn’t eat dinner before Mary (did= (ate dinner).
2. John didn’t eat dinner, before Mary (did= (ate dinner).
Again, I’d appreciate your help.
Best,
Ray
Mark Brader
> 1. John didn't eat dinner before Mary (did= (ate dinner).
> 2. John didn't eat dinner, before Mary (did= (ate dinner).
1 is right, 2 is wrong.
--
Mark Brader | "The race is not always to the swift,
Toronto | nor the battle to the strong --
m...@vex.net | but that is the way to bet it." --Damon Runyon
John Dean
> "Ray" asks about:
>> 1. John didn't eat dinner before Mary (did= (ate dinner).
>> 2. John didn't eat dinner, before Mary (did= (ate dinner).
>
> 1 is right, 2 is wrong.
Although confusing, in the version without the 'did'. It can have the
meaning suggested but it can also mean John wasn't the kind of person to eat
dinner until he started associating with Mary.
--
John Dean
Oxford
Mark Brader
>>> 1. John didn't eat dinner before Mary (did= (ate dinner).
>>> 2. John didn't eat dinner, before Mary (did= (ate dinner).
I (Mark Brader) wrote:
>> 1 is right, 2 is wrong.
John Dean writes:
> Although confusing, in the version without the 'did'. It can have the
> meaning suggested but it can also mean John wasn't the kind of person
> to eat dinner until he started associating with Mary.
I took the parenthetical words to be specifying the meaning intended,
so that the question was only about punctuation.
--
Mark Brader | The situation will continue to deteriorate until we [get]
m...@vex.net | an effective governing authority... When that wonderful
Toronto | day finally comes, we will once again resent the stupid
| laws [they] will inevitably hold over us. --Mark Crispin
mm
<raymondali...@yahoo.com.tw> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>
>I was wondering about whether the placement of the before-clause makes
>a difference in its interpretation relative to the rest of the clause.
>Is there any difference in meaning between the 1st and the 2nd
>sentences below?
>
>
>
>1. John didn�t eat dinner before Mary (did= (ate dinner).
>
>2. John didn�t eat dinner, before Mary (did= (ate dinner).
I don't know what 2 means. If it means the same as 1, omit the comma.
>
>Again, I�d appreciate your help.
>
>Best,
>
>Ray
--
Posters should say where they live, and for which area
they are asking questions. I was born and then lived in
Western Pa. 10 years
Indianapolis 7 years
Chicago 6 years
Brooklyn, NY 12 years
Baltimore 26 years
BMCT2010
The comma in the sentence makes no difference.
alan
"BMCT2010" <BMCT...@AOL.com> wrote in message
news:dba858a6-d283-4b6f...@c3g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 13, 10:53 am, Ray <raymondaliasapoll...@yahoo.com.tw> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was wondering about whether the placement of the before-clause makes
> a difference in its interpretation relative to the rest of the clause.
> Is there any difference in meaning between the 1st and the 2nd
> sentences below?
>
>
> 2. John didn�t eat dinner, before Mary (did= (ate dinner).
>
> Again, I�d appreciate your help.
>
> Best,
>
> Ray
|:The comma in the sentence makes no difference.
Of course it makes a difference --- it's just plain worng
Peter Moylan
> On Dec 13, 10:53 am, Ray <raymondaliasapoll...@yahoo.com.tw> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was wondering about whether the placement of the before-clause makes
>> a difference in its interpretation relative to the rest of the clause.
>> Is there any difference in meaning between the 1st and the 2nd
>> sentences below?
>>
>>
>> 2. John didn�t eat dinner, before Mary (did= (ate dinner).
>>
>> Again, I�d appreciate your help.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Ray
>
> The comma in the sentence makes no difference.
Of course it does. With the comma, it's an error.
--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.
Chuck Riggs
<___in_fla...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"BMCT2010" <BMCT...@AOL.com> wrote in message
>news:dba858a6-d283-4b6f...@c3g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>On Dec 13, 10:53 am, Ray <raymondaliasapoll...@yahoo.com.tw> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was wondering about whether the placement of the before-clause makes
>> a difference in its interpretation relative to the rest of the clause.
>> Is there any difference in meaning between the 1st and the 2nd
>> sentences below?
>>
>> 1. John didn�t eat dinner before Mary (did= (ate dinner).
>>
>> 2. John didn�t eat dinner, before Mary (did= (ate dinner).
>>
>> Again, I�d appreciate your help.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Ray
>
>|:The comma in the sentence makes no difference.
>
>Of course it makes a difference --- it's just plain worng
Yes, worng as worng can be.
--
Regards,
Chuck Riggs,
An American who lives near Dublin, Ireland and usually spells in BrE
alan
"Chuck Riggs" <chr...@eircom.net> wrote in message
news:q6c1j5dh7uubci37b...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 21 Dec 2009 18:54:08 -0800, "alan"
> <___in_fla...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"BMCT2010" <BMCT...@AOL.com> wrote in message
>>news:dba858a6-d283-4b6f...@c3g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>>On Dec 13, 10:53 am, Ray <raymondaliasapoll...@yahoo.com.tw> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I was wondering about whether the placement of the before-clause makes
>>> a difference in its interpretation relative to the rest of the clause.
>>> Is there any difference in meaning between the 1st and the 2nd
>>> sentences below?
>>>
>>> 1. John didn't eat dinner before Mary (did= (ate dinner).
>>>
>>> 2. John didn't eat dinner, before Mary (did= (ate dinner).
>>>
>>> Again, I'd appreciate your help.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Ray
>>
>>|:The comma in the sentence makes no difference.
>>
>>Of course it makes a difference --- it's just plain worng
>
> Yes, worng as worng can be.
And that's pretty darn worng . . . ;-)