Teresa
Bob Cunningham
In a series of statements about Teresa née Heinz on "60
Minutes" week before last, the voice said
Born in Mozambique, Africa, her father was a
Portuguese doctor.
Who was born in Mozambique, Teresa or her father?
I think the statement is plainly saying her father was, but
a lady I know sees no reason to interpret the statement any
other way than that Teresa was.
Arcadian Rises
<exw...@earthlink.net> writes:
No matter who was born in Mozambic, the sentence is wrong because the second
part is a non-sequitur.
Harvey Van Sickle
My immediate reaction was that of your lady friend -- since the
statement was about Teresa, I'd assume that's whose birthplace they
were talking about.
But it's obviously a bad construction.
--
Cheers, Harvey
Ottawa/Toronto/Edmonton for 30 years;
Southern England for the past 21 years.
(for e-mail, change harvey to whhvs)
Aaron J. Dinkin
> In a series of statements about Teresa née Heinz
Nee Ferreira, actually. Heinz was her first husband's surname.
-Aaron J. Dinkin
Dr. Whom
Gary Vellenzer
arcadi...@aol.com says...
father being a Portuguese doctor". there is no non-sequitur that I can
see.
Gary
Bob Cunningham
Rises) said:
It doesn't strike me that way. To me it says the same as
Her father, born in Mozambique, Africa, was a
Portuguese doctor.
which is the equivalent to
Her father, who was born in Mozambique, Africa,
was a Portuguese doctor.
But I know deep down that the intended meaning was
She was born in Mozambique, Africa. Her father
was a Portuguese doctor.
They just didn't say that. They said something else.
By the way, there's no such place as Mozambic. There's a
country called Mozambique, a citizen of which is a
Mozambican. (_MWCD11_)
Steve Hayes
wrote:
>
I once had to edit one that came over the wire service, which said: "Prime
Minister, Mr Edward Heath's father, died yesterday aged ...."
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Arcadian Rises
Hayes) writes:
>
>I once had to edit one that came over the wire service, which said: "Prime
>Minister, Mr Edward Heath's father, died yesterday aged ...."
>
If it's a well know fact who is who, then readers understand who died. I
believe the editor was more concerned to begin the sentence with "Prime
Minister".
Arcadian Rises
<exw...@earthlink.net> writes:
>On 03 Feb 2004 19:57:42 GMT, arcadi...@aol.com (Arcadian
>Rises) said:
>
>> In article <j0tv10lffhfsfan6b...@4ax.com>, Bob Cunningham
>> <exw...@earthlink.net> writes:
>
>> >In a series of statements about Teresa née Heinz on "60
>> >Minutes" week before last, the voice said
>
>> > Born in Mozambique, Africa, her father was a
>> > Portuguese doctor.
>
>> >Who was born in Mozambique, Teresa or her father?
>
>> >I think the statement is plainly saying her father was, but
>> >a lady I know sees no reason to interpret the statement any
>> >other way than that Teresa was.
>
>> No matter who was born in Mozambic, the sentence is
>> wrong because the second part is a non-sequitur.
>
>It doesn't strike me that way.
Many biographies, for the sake of brevity, fill one sentence with unrelated
information, e.g.
"Born in Patagonia, he started school at the age of 6"
If it's a well known fact that in Patagonia children start school at the age of
8, then there is an implied "Although" [he was born in P]. Otherwise, the
second part has no connection with the first part.
However, it's done all the time and I myself prefer this type of non-sequitur
to a strafe of short sentences: "He was born in Patagonia. He started school
when he was 6.etc".
> To me it says the same as
>
> Her father, born in Mozambique, Africa, was a
> Portuguese doctor.
>
>which is the equivalent to
>
> Her father, who was born in Mozambique, Africa,
> was a Portuguese doctor.
>
>But I know deep down that the intended meaning was
>
> She was born in Mozambique, Africa. Her father
> was a Portuguese doctor.
>
>They just didn't say that. They said something else.
For the sake of brevity. In many cases the meaning is clear from the context,
notwithstanding the poor wording, that's why some editors prefer to sacrifice
the accuracy of style to brevity. We get bored if the biography is too long.
>
>By the way, there's no such place as Mozambic. There's a
>country called Mozambique, a citizen of which is a
>Mozambican. (_MWCD11_)
This time it was a typo, I promise.
K. Edgcombe
Harvey Van Sickle <harve...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>On 03 Feb 2004, Bob Cunningham wrote
>
>>
>> In a series of statements about Teresa née Heinz on "60
>> Minutes" week before last, the voice said
>>
>> Born in Mozambique, Africa, her father was a
>> Portuguese doctor.
>>
>> Who was born in Mozambique, Teresa or her father?
>>
>> I think the statement is plainly saying her father was, but
>> a lady I know sees no reason to interpret the statement any
>> other way than that Teresa was.
>
>My immediate reaction was that of your lady friend -- since the
>statement was about Teresa, I'd assume that's whose birthplace they
>were talking about.
>
>But it's obviously a bad construction.
I've just been listening to a couple of the novels of Jane Austen, read on
cassette tape. It is much slower than my normal reading pace, and I find that
I become very aware of sentence construction. I have been surprised how often
Miss Austen uses the construction above; it may, as you say, be a bad
construction but it has an honourable history. In those days I assume it was
not liable to misinterpretation, since she might fairly be described as a
careful writer.
Katy
Javi
Harvey Van Sickle <harve...@ntlworld.com> typed:
> On 03 Feb 2004, Bob Cunningham wrote
>
>>
>> In a series of statements about Teresa née Heinz on "60
>> Minutes" week before last, the voice said
>>
>> Born in Mozambique, Africa, her father was a
>> Portuguese doctor.
>>
>> Who was born in Mozambique, Teresa or her father?
>>
>> I think the statement is plainly saying her father was, but
>> a lady I know sees no reason to interpret the statement any
>> other way than that Teresa was.
>
> My immediate reaction was that of your lady friend -- since the
> statement was about Teresa, I'd assume that's whose birthplace they
> were talking about.
>
> But it's obviously a bad construction.
My first reaction was that of Harvey, but I am not a native speaker. To me,
it sounds as a bad calque from some language, probably French, German or
Portuguese, whose participles have different forms for different genders,
and also a similar construction to that of Latin called "absolute
participle" or "ablativus absolutus"; in those languages there is no
ambiguity, as in Spanish:
"NacidA en Mozambique, su padre fue un médico portugués."
Maybe the speaker was reading a translation.
--
Saludos cordiales
Javi
The right of the people to keep and arm bears shall not be infringed.
Steve Hayes
My theory is that the writer was trying to imitate Timespeak, but added an
extra comma.
Bob Cunningham
<poziyo...@hotmail.com> said:
> In news:Xns9484CD15...@194.168.222.41,
> Harvey Van Sickle <harve...@ntlworld.com> typed:
> > On 03 Feb 2004, Bob Cunningham wrote
> >> In a series of statements about Teresa née Heinz
(Note that "née" is an error here, as caught by Aaron
Dinkin. Heinz was not her maiden name, but a previous
married name.)
> >> on "60 Minutes" week before last, the voice said
> >> Born in Mozambique, Africa, her father was a
> >> Portuguese doctor.
> >> Who was born in Mozambique, Teresa or her father?
> >> I think the statement is plainly saying her father was, but
> >> a lady I know sees no reason to interpret the statement any
> >> other way than that Teresa was.
> > My immediate reaction was that of your lady friend -- since the
> > statement was about Teresa, I'd assume that's whose birthplace they
> > were talking about.
> > But it's obviously a bad construction.
Yes, "who was born in Mozambique" is not just a dangling
antecedent; it's an antecedent that falsely seems to have a
back reference in "her father".
A parallel example is "Flying over the jungle, a family of
gorillas was seen".
(What's a better name than "back reference" for the thing an
antecedent is the antecedent of? "Anaphora" seems close,
but not close enough. "Complement"?)
> My first reaction was that of Harvey, but I am not a native speaker. To me,
> it sounds as a bad calque from some language, probably French, German or
> Portuguese, whose participles have different forms for different genders,
> and also a similar construction to that of Latin called "absolute
> participle" or "ablativus absolutus"; in those languages there is no
> ambiguity, as in Spanish:
> "NacidA en Mozambique, su padre fue un médico portugués."
> Maybe the speaker was reading a translation.
That's an intriguing possibility, but it doesn't seem to
hold here. The remark was read by one of the regulars on
the "60 Minutes" TV show. The text was written by whoever
on the staff writes the things the people say. There's no
reason to think it could have been a translation.
Ben Zimmer
>
> On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 19:24:58 GMT, Bob Cunningham <exw...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > In a series of statements about Teresa née Heinz
>
> Nee Ferreira, actually. Heinz was her first husband's surname.
Née Simões-Ferreira, if you want to get technical about it. She's the
daughter of José Simões-Ferreira and Irene Thierstein, and her full name
is Maria Teresa Thierstein Simões-Ferreira Heinz Kerry.
Robert Lieblich
Doesn't sound all that Irish to me.
--
Bob Lieblich
Not all that Czech, either
Bob Cunningham
Seems like "Ferreira" might rhyme with "de Valera".
John Dean
You'd struggle to fit that on a soup tin.
--
John Dean
Oxford
Josenildo Marques
> Seems like "Ferreira" might rhyme with "de Valera".
No, they don't rhyme, but their sounds are very similar.
Josenildo Marques
> My first reaction was that of Harvey, but I am not a native speaker. To me,
> it sounds as a bad calque from some language, probably French, German or
> Portuguese, whose participles have different forms for different genders,
> and also a similar construction to that of Latin called "absolute
> participle" or "ablativus absolutus"; in those languages there is no
> ambiguity, as in Spanish:
>
> "NacidA en Mozambique, su padre fue un médico portugués."
>
> Maybe the speaker was reading a translation.
That's correct. In my first language, Brazilian Portuguese, there would be
no ambiguity.
"NascidA em Moçambique, seu pai era um médico português."
For whatever it's worth...
Javi
Bob Cunningham <exw...@earthlink.net> typed:
> On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 23:04:16 +0100, "Javi"
> <poziyo...@hotmail.com> said:
>
>> In news:Xns9484CD15...@194.168.222.41,
>> Harvey Van Sickle <harve...@ntlworld.com> typed:
>>> On 03 Feb 2004, Bob Cunningham wrote
>
>>>> In a series of statements about Teresa née Heinz
>
> (Note that "née" is an error here, as caught by Aaron
> Dinkin. Heinz was not her maiden name, but a previous
> married name.)
>
>>>> on "60 Minutes" week before last, the voice said
>
>>>> Born in Mozambique, Africa, her father was a
>>>> Portuguese doctor.
[snip]
>>> But it's obviously a bad construction.
>
> Yes, "who was born in Mozambique" is not just a dangling
> antecedent; it's an antecedent that falsely seems to have a
> back reference in "her father".
>
> A parallel example is "Flying over the jungle, a family of
> gorillas was seen".
>
> (What's a better name than "back reference" for the thing an
> antecedent is the antecedent of? "Anaphora" seems close,
> but not close enough. "Complement"?)
Cataphora, cataphoric?
>> My first reaction was that of Harvey, but I am not a native speaker.
>> To me, it sounds as a bad calque from some language, probably
>> French, German or Portuguese, whose participles have different forms
>> for different genders, and also a similar construction to that of
>> Latin called "absolute participle" or "ablativus absolutus"; in
>> those languages there is no ambiguity, as in Spanish:
>
>> "NacidA en Mozambique, su padre fue un médico portugués."
>
>> Maybe the speaker was reading a translation.
>
> That's an intriguing possibility, but it doesn't seem to
> hold here. The remark was read by one of the regulars on
> the "60 Minutes" TV show. The text was written by whoever
> on the staff writes the things the people say. There's no
> reason to think it could have been a translation.
My suggestion was on the line that the original information about Teresa
could have been in languages other than English, and the sentence could have
made its way into English.
--
Saludos cordiales
Javi
Mood conjugation:
I enjoy a drop
You never say no
He is an alcoholic
(Craig Brown)
Bob Cunningham
<poziyo...@hotmail.com> said:
> In news:h6f4201qpakb3sq6e...@4ax.com,
> Bob Cunningham <exw...@earthlink.net> typed:
[...]
> > (What's a better name than "back reference" for the thing an
> > antecedent is the antecedent of? "Anaphora" seems close,
> > but not close enough. "Complement"?)
> Cataphora, cataphoric?
I don't think so. A cataphoric term refers to a *following*
term, an anaphoric term to a *preceding* term.
From _Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary Eleventh
Edition_:
anaphoric
: of or relating to anaphora *an anaphoric
usage*; especially : being a word or phrase
that takes its reference from another word or
phrase and especially from a preceding word or
phrase -- compare CATAPHORIC
cataphoric
: of or relating to cataphora; especially
: being a word or phrase (as a pronoun) that
takes its reference from a following word or
phrase (as her in _before her Jane saw nothing
but desert_) -- compare ANAPHORIC
Incidentally, while "anaphora" is a mode of expression and
"anaphoric" describes something that's used that way, the
term so used can be called an anaphor. However, the only
place I've found "anaphor" so far is in _MWCD11_. It's not
in the online _Oxford English Dictionary_, nor is it in
the_New Shorter Oxford_ or the tenth _Collegiate_.
Interesting to see, the analogous "cataphor" isn't in any
dictionary I've checked.
Anyway, the word I wish I knew, a name for the thing an
antecedent is an antecedent of, doesn't seem to be quite
"anaphora", and it's clearly not "cataphora". I suppose,
though, that we could call it an anaphor and be prepared to
defend the usage with at least a little justification.
R J Valentine
} Subject: Re: 7396522 [was: Re: Teresa]
Very funny! *Very* funny. This guy cracks me up.
--
R. J. Valentine <mailto:739...@wicked.smart.net>
John O'Flaherty
Maybe you could call it the succedent. Not of itself, of course, but
of its antecedent.
--
john
Bob Cunningham
> >[...]
"Succedent" seems reasonable. (It is in the _New Shorter
Oxford_ as a noun, although it's tagged obsolete.) It seems
hard to believe, though, that there isn't an established
word for the thing.
Hmmm ... It just occurred to me to look in
_Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Synonyms_, which has
antonyms for most of its entries:
The adjective "antecedent" has antonyms "consequent" and
"subsequent". The noun has the antonym "consequence" and
contrasting words "effect, result, issue, sequel,
aftereffect, aftermath, upshot".
For "consequent" _The New Shorter Oxford_ has as one
definition
b spec. The second part of a conditional proposition,
dependent on the antecedent. E17.
("spec." stands for either "specific" or "specifically".)
That's getting pretty close, but I wish they had a
definition tagged "gram." for "grammar". Anyway, in the
absence of a good precedent in grammar, I would shy away
from "consequent" because it has too much connotation of
cause and effect.
I don't see a grammar definition of "subsequent", but it
seems more acceptable than "consequent", since it connotes
merely following, not caused by.
There's an intriguing quotation in the online _Oxford
English Dictionary_ under the physical-geography definition
of "subsequent":
1970 R. J. SMALL Study of Landforms vii. 234 In an
area where the structure comprises a series of
anticlines and synclines, one is tempted..to regard
all synclinal streams as longitudinal consequents and
all anticlinal streams as subsequents.
I'm only saying it's intriguing, not that I know what the
heck it means. (Note that it intersects with the
"253471-001" thread.)
Ben Zimmer
It's in the 11th:
Main Entry: anaphor
Etymology: back-formation of <anaphoric>
Date: 1975
a word or phrase with an anaphoric function
> Anyway, the word I wish I knew, a name for the thing an
> antecedent is an antecedent of, doesn't seem to be quite
> "anaphora", and it's clearly not "cataphora". I suppose,
> though, that we could call it an anaphor and be prepared to
> defend the usage with at least a little justification.
No real justification needed-- it's in common use by linguists (304 hits
on Linguist List, 48 in conjunction with "antecedent").
Didn't you recognize "anaphor" as an acceptable term a few years ago in
the thread below?
Ben Zimmer
>
> > Incidentally, while "anaphora" is a mode of expression and
> > "anaphoric" describes something that's used that way, the
> > term so used can be called an anaphor. However, the only
> > place I've found "anaphor" so far is in _MWCD11_. It's not
> > in the online _Oxford English Dictionary_, nor is it in
> > the_New Shorter Oxford_ or the tenth _Collegiate_.
>
> It's in the 11th:
>
> Main Entry: anaphor
> Etymology: back-formation of <anaphoric>
> Date: 1975
> a word or phrase with an anaphoric function
Sorry-- meant to say, it was also in the 10th (same def, same date).
Actually, you mentioned the MWCD10 definition in the 2001 thread (along
with a definition in the New Oxford Dictionary of English).
Bob Cunningham
One of the few nice things about being an octogenarian is
that it lets you delight in discovering "new" things, the
while being oblivious to the fact that you've been delighted
to discover the same new things at least once in quite
recent years.
Yes, I see now that Evan Kirshenbaum gave us "anaphor" for
the meaning I had in mind, and I was pleased to learn that
it had been used that way.
--
Bob Cunningham, Senile Old Git, Southern California, USA
I've been young and I've been old; young is better.
-- Woody Wordpeckere, 1996
(Paraphrasing Sophie Tucker)