Author Topic: New column-type thingy (Read 107828 times)

Jonathon · « **Reply #450 on:** August 07, 2012, 03:17:14 PM »

The exciting conclusion: The Data Is In, pt. 2.

BlackBlade · « **Reply #451 on:** August 08, 2012, 08:16:28 AM »

I enjoyed both parts, but especially part 2.

Jonathon · « **Reply #452 on:** August 08, 2012, 09:09:38 AM »

Thanks!

Ela · « **Reply #453 on:** August 14, 2012, 05:00:38 PM »

I also enjoyed the articles.

Jonathon · « **Reply #454 on:** August 14, 2012, 05:37:58 PM »

Thanks!

Tante Shvester · « **Reply #455 on:** August 15, 2012, 06:54:55 AM »

I didn't only enjoy the articles, I enjoyed all the parts of speech!

Brinestone · « **Reply #456 on:** August 15, 2012, 07:20:23 AM »

Wakka wakka wakka!

Jonathon · « **Reply #457 on:** August 29, 2012, 10:43:13 PM »

Relative What

BlackBlade · « **Reply #458 on:** August 30, 2012, 06:22:58 AM »

Hmm, my German FIL uses "what" that way regularly. "He climbed up on the roof, what to get his tools he left up there." Or is that not quite what you were writing about?

Jonathon · « **Reply #459 on:** August 30, 2012, 10:44:55 AM »

Hmm. I'm not quite sure if that's the same. I'm talking about it in the sense in which we'd normally use that or which. In English, we wouldn't use anything where your FIL used that what. But German does use was, which is cognate with English what, as a relative pronoun in some constructions, usually referring to a whole clause rather than just a single word or phrase.

BlackBlade · « **Reply #460 on:** August 30, 2012, 11:44:44 AM »

Quote from: Jonathon on August 30, 2012, 10:44:55 AM

Hmm. I'm not quite sure if that's the same. I'm talking about it in the sense in which we'd normally use that or which. In English, we wouldn't use anything where your FIL used that what. But German does use was, which is cognate with English what, as a relative pronoun in some constructions, usually referring to a whole clause rather than just a single word or phrase.

So what's an example of a full English sentence using what the way your column describes? I read the bit about the prayer, but I'm still havin troubl grasping it.

Jonathon · « **Reply #461 on:** August 30, 2012, 12:34:09 PM »

The only twentieth-century example in the OED is "If I sat down to write a book, I'd want to shove in all what I saw." Standard English would use all that I saw. In the example from the prayer, the standard construction would be "our leaders who guide and direct us" or "our leaders that guide and direct us". Does that help?

BlackBlade · « **Reply #462 on:** August 30, 2012, 01:15:55 PM »

Quote from: Jonathon on August 30, 2012, 12:34:09 PM

The only twentieth-century example in the OED is "If I sat down to write a book, I'd want to shove in all what I saw." Standard English would use all that I saw. In the example from the prayer, the standard construction would be "our leaders who guide and direct us" or "our leaders that guide and direct us". Does that help?

So what about, "I went back up on the roof to get all the tools what I left up there."?

My FIL would say it that way as well.

Jonathon · « **Reply #463 on:** August 30, 2012, 01:29:07 PM »

Yup, that's what I'm talking about.

I find it interesting that a German speaker would do that. The normal German way of making a relative clause is to use a form of the demonstrative pronoun (roughly like that), unless the relative refers to an indefinite thing or a whole clause, in which case they use the interrogative was. So where we'd say It's something that I've never seen, they'd say something like Es ist etwas, was ich niemals gesehen habe, where was is "what"—"It was something what I've never seen." But when referring to something definite, like "the tools", I was taught to use a demonstrative, which in this case would be die.

But it could be that what I taught is "proper" German, while your father-in-law is using something more colloquial. I don't know German grammar well enough.

BlackBlade · « **Reply #464 on:** August 30, 2012, 01:50:53 PM »

Could also be when he learned English he wasn't comfortable with pronouncing the th in that and swapped in 'what' in lieu of that. Do Germans have any trouble forming that syllable?

Jonathon · « **Reply #465 on:** August 30, 2012, 02:21:35 PM »

Yeah, the th sounds are not found in German. For a lot of native German-speakers who have learned English, that comes out more like dat—maybe zat for some speakers. Now that I'm thinking about it, I'm not sure, but I think voiced th usually becomes d, and voiceless th becomes s.

This is just a guess, but it seems more likely to me that he's just translating something straight over from his dialect of German. There's a lot more dialectal variation in Germany than in the US, so it wouldn't surprise me if there are regions where speakers use was rather than der/die/das. Of course, I know less about regional German dialects than I do about Standard German, so I'm really just speculating.

BlackBlade · « **Reply #466 on:** August 30, 2012, 02:31:04 PM »

The only thing I know is that he was born in what used to be Prussia. I believ North East. Not that that helps.

Tante Shvester · « **Reply #467 on:** August 30, 2012, 09:19:15 PM »

"He doesn't know from what he's doing." Is that an example from what you mean?

Jonathon · « **Reply #468 on:** August 31, 2012, 07:31:07 PM »

I'm not sure what that is, but it's not what I'm talking about either. Basically, a relative pronoun attaches a clause to some sort of noun phrase. As a pronoun, it has to refer to something in the main clause. So in The man who knew too little, who is a relative pronoun referring to man, and it serves as the subject of the relative clause who knew too little. In He doesn't know from what he's doing, what might be a nominal (or fused) relative, which means that it contains its own noun phrase and thus doesn't have to refer to something else. In He wants what he can't have, what serves simultaneously as an object of the main clause (He wants what) and as an object of the relative clause (he can't have what). This becomes clearer if you replace it with that which or the thing that or something similar. Then you have a separate noun phrase or pronoun for the relative pronoun (that or which) to refer to.

But even if what is a nominal relative in your example, I don't really know what the from is doing there. Is this a Yiddishism?

Annie Subjunctive · « **Reply #469 on:** September 01, 2012, 06:09:04 AM »

It seems that "what" used as a relative pronoun is used in Cockney. All I know about Cockney, though, comes from watching period dramas. Is that the case?

Jonathon · « **Reply #470 on:** September 01, 2012, 10:01:00 AM »

Someone actually just posted a comment saying that it's very common in Cockney.

Annie Subjunctive · « **Reply #471 on:** September 02, 2012, 07:19:32 AM »

Aha! Masterpiece Theater does me well again.

BlackBlade · « **Reply #472 on:** September 02, 2012, 07:49:24 AM »

Today from Hatrack,

"And then taking credit for it! When it wasn't really him what done it!"

I was like heyyyyy!

Jonathon · « **Reply #473 on:** September 02, 2012, 09:55:00 AM »

Cool! Where is that?

BlackBlade · « **Reply #474 on:** September 02, 2012, 03:42:31 PM »

Here.