Judgment Tests
Judgment Tests
"That's the kind of thing [that] people would find weird if they saw you doing."
Is that bolded bit grammatical for you? It's the first thing my brain came up with, but for some reason it rings false, even though I can't come up with a better way of saying it.
Also, can silly be made into an adverb (i.e. is sillily grammatical)? It's in the Wiktionary category for "dated English words," and it sounds kind of funny to me, anyways. If not, would you express it periphrastically (like in a silly way)?
Is that bolded bit grammatical for you? It's the first thing my brain came up with, but for some reason it rings false, even though I can't come up with a better way of saying it.
Also, can silly be made into an adverb (i.e. is sillily grammatical)? It's in the Wiktionary category for "dated English words," and it sounds kind of funny to me, anyways. If not, would you express it periphrastically (like in a silly way)?
- roninbodhisattva
- Avisaru
- Posts: 568
- Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2006 11:50 pm
- Location: California
Re: Judgment Tests
I need a pronoun:Antirri wrote: "That's the kind of thing [that] people would find weird if they saw you doing."
Is that bolded bit grammatical for you? It's the first thing my brain came up with, but for some reason it rings false, even though I can't come up with a better way of saying it.
"That's the kind of thing [that] people would find weird if they saw you doing it."
Damn extraction across binding nodes.
- Aurora Rossa
- Smeric
- Posts: 1138
- Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 11:46 am
- Location: The vendée of America
- Contact:
Re: Judgment Tests
Yes, same here.roninbodhisattva wrote:I need a pronoun:
"That's the kind of thing [that] people would find weird if they saw you doing it."
Damn extraction across binding nodes.
"There was a particular car I soon came to think of as distinctly St. Louis-ish: a gigantic white S.U.V. with a W. bumper sticker on it for George W. Bush."
Re: Judgment Tests
It sounds much better with "it", but for me it's something that just doesn't work in English.
Re: Judgment Tests
I prefer it without it, I think.
I sillily forgot to bring my dinosaur (or whatever) also sounds fine, to me.
I sillily forgot to bring my dinosaur (or whatever) also sounds fine, to me.
-
- Avisaru
- Posts: 704
- Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 9:41 am
- Location: NY, USA
Re: Judgment Tests
As with the others I'd use a resumptive pronoun. An alternative is "That's the sort of thing that if people saw you doing it, they'd find it weird."Antirri wrote:"That's the kind of thing [that] people would find weird if they saw you doing."
I'd either go with something like "walk" → "do a silly walk" or "draw" → "draw a silly thing"/"draw something silly", but [sɪɫ.(l)ɪ.liː] isn't too horrible. (Not sure if it's actually geminate.)Antirri wrote:Also, can silly be made into an adverb (i.e. is sillily grammatical)? It's in the Wiktionary category for "dated English words," and it sounds kind of funny to me, anyways. If not, would you express it periphrastically (like in a silly way)?
Re: Judgment Tests
There's a difference between "drawing something silly" and "drawing something sillily", i.e. "in a silly way". The latter refers to the way of drawing, the former to the output (alternative: "sillily drawing something").Bob Johnson wrote:"draw" → "draw a silly thing"/"draw something silly"
JAL
Re: Judgment Tests
I'd find that version more awkward that the version with the pronoun.Bob Johnson wrote:As with the others I'd use a resumptive pronoun. An alternative is "That's the sort of thing that if people saw you doing it, they'd find it weird."Antirri wrote:"That's the kind of thing [that] people would find weird if they saw you doing."
And I wouldn't say sillily is wrong, but I wouldn't say it much either. "He rather sillily ..." does seem like something I might say though.
[quote]Great wit and madness near abide, and fine a line their bounds divide.[/quote]
Re: Judgment Tests
Huh. To me, adding it makes it sound like there's something extra that shouldn't be there, although rephrasing everything works for me as well. What's the it here? A "resumptive pronoun?"
Re: Judgment Tests
I prefer the option without the pronoun, although it's a bit unwieldy and a bit unnatural. I have a bit of an aversion to the ones with extra pronouns, although it's probably just some kind of snobbery as I'm fairly sure I will just happily insert them if needed in practice.roninbodhisattva wrote:I need a pronoun:Antirri wrote: "That's the kind of thing [that] people would find weird if they saw you doing."
Is that bolded bit grammatical for you? It's the first thing my brain came up with, but for some reason it rings false, even though I can't come up with a better way of saying it.
"That's the kind of thing [that] people would find weird if they saw you doing it."
Damn extraction across binding nodes.
-
- Avisaru
- Posts: 704
- Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 9:41 am
- Location: NY, USA
Re: Judgment Tests
How do you feel about "the thing your aunt gave you which you don't know what it is"?finlay wrote:I prefer the option without the pronoun, although it's a bit unwieldy and a bit unnatural. I have a bit of an aversion to the ones with extra pronouns, although it's probably just some kind of snobbery as I'm fairly sure I will just happily insert them if needed in practice.
Re: Judgment Tests
I don't like it, but I can't think of a way to rephrase it and in practice will probably use it without noticing.
Re: Judgment Tests
Yeah, I find that I'd also say this, "...which you don't know what is." Hrm.Bob Johnson wrote:How do you feel about "the thing your aunt gave you which you don't know what it is"?finlay wrote:I prefer the option without the pronoun, although it's a bit unwieldy and a bit unnatural. I have a bit of an aversion to the ones with extra pronouns, although it's probably just some kind of snobbery as I'm fairly sure I will just happily insert them if needed in practice.
Re: Judgment Tests
I find the example in the first post completely grammatical, and that is how I would always say it. Putting an "it" at the end sounds like a hyper-correction, or too many words.
- linguofreak
- Lebom
- Posts: 123
- Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 10:39 pm
- Location: Somewhere
- Contact:
Re: Judgment Tests
Sounds fine to me.Antirri wrote:"That's the kind of thing [that] people would find weird if they saw you doing."
Is that bolded bit grammatical for you?
Re: Judgment Tests
I also find nothing wrong with the sentence, and definitely prefer it without the resumptive pronoun although I think I might say it both with and without the pronoun in informal speech--it's just that in writing, when I have time to think about it, "it" seems superfluous.linguofreak wrote:Sounds fine to me.Antirri wrote:"That's the kind of thing [that] people would find weird if they saw you doing."
Is that bolded bit grammatical for you?
I'd have to include the pronoun if I were to say "which you don't know what (it) is", but in reality I'd remove the relativizer altogether and replace it with a conjunction, so I'd have "the thing your aunt gave you and you don't know what it is".Antirri wrote:Yeah, I find that I'd also say this, "...which you don't know what is." Hrm.Bob Johnson wrote:How do you feel about "the thing your aunt gave you which you don't know what it is"?finlay wrote:I prefer the option without the pronoun, although it's a bit unwieldy and a bit unnatural. I have a bit of an aversion to the ones with extra pronouns, although it's probably just some kind of snobbery as I'm fairly sure I will just happily insert them if needed in practice.
'Course, there's still a resumptive pronoun in there. I thought it might have to do with whether the removed noun is a subject or object, but then realized that I found no problem in "that's the kind of thing that people would find weird if they saw working". In fact, I judge the following three sentences to be grammatical and idiomatic:
- (1a) "That's the kind of thing that people would find weird if they saw it working".
(1b) "That's the kind of thing that people would find weird if they saw working."
(2a) "That's the kind of plan that would surprise me if it ended up working."
- (2b) *"That's the kind of plan that would surprise me if ended up working."
- (2c) "That's the kind of plan that would surprise me ending up working."
- (2d) "That's the kind of plan that would surprise me by ending up working."
Re: Judgment Tests
"That's the kind of thing [that] people would find weird if they saw you doing it." -- without doubt.
"The thing your aunt gave you of which you don't know what it is." -- maybe. Without, it sounds worse. Still sounds awkward though
"The thing your aunt gave you of which you don't know what it is." -- maybe. Without, it sounds worse. Still sounds awkward though
— o noth sidiritt Tormiott
Re: Judgment Tests
To me it sounds possibly a little more grammatical with the "it", but I wouldn't react to the first one either, I think.
Re: Judgment Tests
I'm not a native speaker, but I like the sentence in the OP better. And I think Zompist has a section about this in the (online; I don't know about the printed) LCK.
Languages I speak fluentlyPřemysl wrote:Oh god, we truly are nerdy. My first instinct was "why didn't he just use sunt and have it all in Latin?".Kereb wrote:they are nerdissimus inter nerdes
English, עברית
Languages I am studying
العربية, 日本語
Conlangs
Athonian
Re: Judgment Tests
I'm not a native speaker either, and I have objections to both sentences. I think one of the complications is the garden path effect caused by "That's the kind of thing [that] people would find weird" being a grammatical sentence. Also, I wonder if the sentence with "it" is more acceptable in case "that" is explicitly used:
- That's the kind of thing that people would find weird if they saw you doing it
as "it" here may refer to "that". Without "that", "it" seems to refer to "the kind of thing", but then "would find weird" misses an object. The sentence without "it" feels incorrect perhaps because both "would find weird" and "saw you doing" need an antecedent, and cannot both have the same (especially it being implicit). Or something.
JAL
- That's the kind of thing that people would find weird if they saw you doing it
as "it" here may refer to "that". Without "that", "it" seems to refer to "the kind of thing", but then "would find weird" misses an object. The sentence without "it" feels incorrect perhaps because both "would find weird" and "saw you doing" need an antecedent, and cannot both have the same (especially it being implicit). Or something.
JAL
Re: Judgment Tests
Sounds good to me without it.
*That's the sort of thing people would judge you for saying/doing/eating/etc.
As for sillily, I would say this:
He's being/acting silly
But never *He's singing silly
*That's the sort of thing people would judge you for saying/doing/eating/etc.
As for sillily, I would say this:
He's being/acting silly
But never *He's singing silly
A New Yorker wrote:Isn't it sort of a relief to talk about the English Premier League instead of the sad state of publishing?
Shtåså, Empotle7á, Neire WippwoAbi wrote:At this point it seems pretty apparent that PIE was simply an ancient esperanto gone awry.
Re: Judgment Tests
...
"That's the kind of thing [that] people would find weird if they saw you doing."
> If they saw you doing, that would be the kind of thing that people would find weird. (Lolwut?)
> If they saw you doing it, that would be the kind of thing that people would find weird. (Haaaaa... Ok. :3)
But both have a slight different meaning...
"That's the kind of thing [that] people would find weird if they saw you doing."
> If they saw you doing, that would be the kind of thing that people would find weird. (Lolwut?)
> If they saw you doing it, that would be the kind of thing that people would find weird. (Haaaaa... Ok. :3)
But both have a slight different meaning...
-
- Sanci
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2011 3:25 pm
Re: Judgment Tests
How do you make -ly adjectives into adverbs, e.g. friendly, silly?
My usual cop-out is "in a ___ manner/way", but that sort of circumlocution can get quite tiring.
My usual cop-out is "in a ___ manner/way", but that sort of circumlocution can get quite tiring.
Re: Judgment Tests
You are someone who says "fastly"?Ouagadougou wrote:How do you make -ly adjectives into adverbs, e.g. friendly, silly?
My usual cop-out is "in a ___ manner/way", but that sort of circumlocution can get quite tiring.
JAL
Re: Judgment Tests
I don't think anyone says that. Just fast or quick in lieu of quickly.jal wrote:You are someone who says "fastly"?Ouagadougou wrote:How do you make -ly adjectives into adverbs, e.g. friendly, silly?
My usual cop-out is "in a ___ manner/way", but that sort of circumlocution can get quite tiring.
JAL