I not having had ...
Marius Hancu
Is "I" still useable these days with non-finite verbal constructions
such as this "having had?"
Or should one use "me?"
-----
Nothing elevated, I not having had the full High School for various
reasons.
The Diviners - Page 45
Margaret Laurence - Fiction - 2007
-----
--
Thanks.
Marius Hancu
Ian Jackson
<389b70ca-b7d9-44c6...@k9g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
Marius Hancu <marius...@gmail.com> writes
>Hello:
>
>Is "I" still useable these days with non-finite verbal constructions
>such as this "having had?"
>
>Or should one use "me?"
>
>-----
>Nothing elevated, I not having had the full High School for various
>reasons.
>
>-----
>--
To me, it seems to be grammatically correct, but the sentence is
incomplete (and messy).
"Not having had the full High School for various reasons" is an 'on the
side' description of "me". However, the use of "I" suggests that a "I"
should be associated directly with a verb (of which "I" is the subject).
For example:
"I, not having had the full High School for various reasons, never
achieved great things".
--
Ian
DanS.
words together as I was on 1/5/2010 in saying:
If one were to assume certain context, it is not an incomplete
sentence. "Nothing" is the subject, and "elevated" is the predicate.
Everything after the comma is a subordinate adjective clause.
Eric Walker
> Is "I" still useable these days with non-finite verbal constructions
> such as this "having had?"
>
> Or should one use "me?"
>
> -----
> Nothing elevated, I not having had the full High School for various
> reasons.
Correct as is, assuming context permits the overall sentence. "Me" would
be horrible there.
--
Cordially,
Eric Walker, Owlcroft House
http://owlcroft.com/english/
Athel Cornish-Bowden
"I" in this sentence is certainly acceptable. I'd probably put "my"
(which some might find even more pedantic than "I") if for some reason
I needed the rest of the sentence to remain unchanged, but otherwise
I'd probably write "Nothing elevated, as I had not had a full high
school education, for various reasons". I've left the first two words
unchanged, as I'm not sure what they mean without a context.
--
athel
Skitt
> Marius Hancu wrote:
>
>> Is "I" still useable these days with non-finite verbal constructions
>> such as this "having had?"
>>
>> Or should one use "me?"
>>
>> -----
>> Nothing elevated, I not having had the full High School for various
>> reasons.
>
> Correct as is, assuming context permits the overall sentence. "Me"
> would be horrible there.
"My" would be the best choice. (I'm guessing at context.)
--
Skitt (AmE)
Eric Walker
It certainly would if that is a simple gerund, as it seems to be. But
the peculiar construction leaves room for the possibility that it is an
awkward attempt at a compound-tense time-relational casting, along the
lines of "I, not having finished my work, was obliged to stay up late."
Marius Hancu
Thank you all.
Marius Hancu
CDB
> On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 10:40:02 -0800, Skitt wrot
>>> Marius Hancu wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is "I" still useable these days with non-finite verbal
>>>> constructions such as this "having had?"
>>>>
>>>> Or should one use "me?"
>>>>
>>>> -----
>>>> Nothing elevated, I not having had the full High School for
>>>> various reasons.
>>>
>>> Correct as is, assuming context permits the overall sentence.
>>> "Me" would be horrible there.
>>
>> "My" would be the best choice. (I'm guessing at context.)
>
> It certainly would if that is a simple gerund, as it seems to be.
> But the peculiar construction leaves room for the possibility that
> it is an awkward attempt at a compound-tense time-relational
> casting, along the lines of "I, not having finished my work, was
> obliged to stay up late."
>
Latin ablative absolute. The "I" is necessarily correct, being the
nominative form of the pronoun, and "having" is a verbal adjective.
It's less awkward in the original, where the OP phrase would be
something like "with-me-not-having-had ...".
Athel Cornish-Bowden
Although my initial preference was for "my", I think you're right. The
problem is that the sentence is very awkward (I'm still mystified by
"Nothing elevated", for example) however one expresses it, and one
really needs to to know exactly what the original author was trying to
say in order to decide how best to say it.
--
athel
CDB
presumably the words are a sentence fragment deprecating the
character's own use of language. Her letter, or something else she
said or wrote, was "nothing elevated".
>
I wonder if Marius will be having a go at _The Stone Angel_? I
thought it was Laurence's best novel. <looks over shoulder> I found
the portrayal of old Hagar Shipley facing death deeply moving, even
though I was young at the time.
Cheryl
> I read the book a long time ago and have no memory of the passage, but
> presumably the words are a sentence fragment deprecating the
> character's own use of language. Her letter, or something else she
> said or wrote, was "nothing elevated".
> I wonder if Marius will be having a go at _The Stone Angel_? I
> thought it was Laurence's best novel. <looks over shoulder> I found
> the portrayal of old Hagar Shipley facing death deeply moving, even
> though I was young at the time.
>
I thought that was a great book and a fascinating character, but I read
it as an adult. At the time, it was one of the novels studied in the
local high school, although I don't remember which level - probably
grade 11 or 12. I wondered what on earth a group of teenagers would make
of Hagar - especially the teenaged boys!
--
Cheryl
CDB
> CDB wrote:
>
[_The Diviners_]
>
>> I wonder if Marius will be having a go at _The Stone Angel_? I
>> thought it was Laurence's best novel. <looks over shoulder> I found
>> the portrayal of old Hagar Shipley facing death deeply moving, even
>> though I was young at the time.
>
> I thought that was a great book and a fascinating character, but I
> read it as an adult. At the time, it was one of the novels studied
> in the local high school, although I don't remember which level -
> probably grade 11 or 12. I wondered what on earth a group of
> teenagers would make of Hagar - especially the teenaged boys!
>
the difference.
Donna Richoux
> Although my initial preference was for "my", I think you're right. The
> problem is that the sentence is very awkward (I'm still mystified by
> "Nothing elevated", for example) however one expresses it, and one
> really needs to to know exactly what the original author was trying to
> say in order to decide how best to say it.
I recognized the original reference as being the format of Google Books,
so it was quite easy to find the actual text. A male character says he
could have taken a job at somewhere-or-other -- but not a very high
position ("nothing elevated"), because of his lack of education.
--
Best -- Donna Richoux