Beauty and complexity of the English language

[SiriBiris]

Grandeur of the English Language:
>
Hi everyone:

I just got this mail from a friend and thought it is nice to share
with you guys.

Cheers.

SiriBiris


> Professor Ernest Brennecke of Columbia is credited with inventing a
> sentence that
> can be made to have eight different meanings by placing ONE WORD in all
> possible
> positions in the sentence: "I hit him in the eye yesterday."
>
> The Query: What is this word?
> The Answer: The word is " ONLY ".
>
> The Message:
> 1. ONLY I hit him in the eye yesterday. (No one else did.)
> 2.I ONLY hit him in the eye yesterday. (Did not slap him.)
> 3.I hit ONLY him in the eye yesterday. (I did not hit others.)
> 4.I hit him ONLY in the eye yesterday. (I did not hit outside the eye.)
> 5.I hit him in ONLY the eye yesterday. (Not other organs.)
> 6.I hit him in the ONLY eye yesterday. (He doesn't have another eye..)
> 7.I hit him in the eye ONLY yesterday. (Not today.)
> 8.I hit him in the eye yesterday ONLY . (Did not wait for today.)
>
> This is the beauty and complexity of the English language

[thame...@gmail.com]

Cool! :D

Is not clear about the difference between the 4th and 5th sentences though =/

And can't understand how the 8th sentence got its meaning :(

--
Sent from my iPad

http://twitter.com/thameera

[Siri biris]

Hi,

This is how I see it: Gess need couple of commas, though.

4.I hit him ONLY  in the eye, yesterday. (I did not hit outside the eye.)
5.I hit him in ONLY  the eye, yesterday. (Not other organs.)
8.I hit him in the eye, yesterday ONLY . (Did not wait for today.)

Adios,

Siribiris

On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 12:44 PM, thame...@gmail.com <thame...@gmail.com> wrote:

Cool! :D

Is not clear about the difference between the 4th and 5th sentences though =/

And can't understand how the 8th sentence got its meaning :(

--

[thame...@gmail.com]

Hmm, but what's the difference between "only in the eye" and "in only the eye"?

[Sujeewa de Silva]

The difference in meaning will be conveyed by the position of 'only'
as well as the placing of stress:

I hit him only IN the eye yesterday. (I didn't hit him outside the
eye.)

I hit him only in the EYE yesterday. (I didn't hit his other organs.)

'I hit him in only the EYE yesterday' may be technically correct but
doesn't sound quite natural to me.

On the other hand, the pattern 'I only hit him in the eye' - where
the
word 'only' occurs between the subject and the main verb - can be
used
for most of the different meanings with appropriate placement of
stress.

I only HIT him in the eye yesterday. (I didn't do anything else to
him.)

I only hit HIM in the eye yesterday. / I hit only HIM in the eye
yesterday. (I didn't hit anybody else.)

I only hit him IN the eye yesterday. / I hit him only IN the eye
yesterday. (I didn't hit him outside the eye.)

I only hit him in the EYE yesterday. / I hit him only in the EYE
yesterday. (I didn't hit his other organs.)

I only hit him in the eye YESTERDAY. / I hit him in the eye only
YESTERDAY. (I didn't hit him any other day - ඊයෙ විතරයි ගැහුවේ. / I
hit him no earlier than yesterday - මේ ඊයෙයි ගැහුවේ.)

'I hit him in the eye yesterday only' is used in the preceding sense
but is rather formal, or would be Indian.

As for the meaning 'No one else hit him', 'Only I hit him in the eye
yesterday' would be the more natural pattern.

On Nov 13, 7:41 am, "thameera...@gmail.com" <thameera...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hmm, but what's the difference between "only in the eye" and "in only the
> eye"?
>

> On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 1:33 AM, Siri biris <sumithkumaras...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hi,
>
> > This is how I see it: Gess need couple of commas, though.
>

> > 4.I hit him* ONLY  in the eye,* yesterday. (I did not hit outside the
> > eye.)
> > 5.I hit him* in ONLY  the eye,* yesterday. (Not other organs.)
> > 8.I hit him in the eye, *yesterday ONLY* . (Did not wait for today.)
>
> > Adios,
>
> > Siribiris

[thame...@gmail.com]

Ah cool, thanks! :D

[Siri biris]

There you go - straight from the horse's mouth. I forget to tell you, that we better wait for Sujeewa's comments. Thanks Sujeewa, for explaining that stressing part.
You are the best, always.

SiriBiris

[Sujeewa de Silva]

You're welcome, pal. But no, I don't think that I'm the best, though I
believe that our people also can master the English language as well
as anybody else can, including the native speakers. So I've never been
happy just to follow grammar rules set down by some native-speaker
grammarian. I've always tried to compare lots of grammar sources and
analyse usage on my own too.

On Nov 14, 1:07 am, Siri biris <sumithkumaras...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There you go - straight from the horse's mouth. I forget to tell you, that
> we better wait for Sujeewa's comments. Thanks Sujeewa, for explaining that
> stressing part.
> You are the best, always.
>
> SiriBiris
>

> On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 9:25 AM, thameera...@gmail.com <

>
>
>
> thameera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Ah cool, thanks! :D
>