Re: [文法] ____ it rains, go into the building.

[nw4m (有奶茶居然沒珍珠)]

※ 引述《l10nel (小失)》之銘言：
: ------
: 回覆：
I think this is where you have to deal with the fact that living, spoken
language doesn't always follow the rules.   It would indeed be an unusual use
of the progressive, but one could imagine a situation where a mother said to
her child, "Bill, take your umbrella:  it's raining soon" to mean "It is
going to rain."   In that case, the native ear would hear it is a kind of
emphasis, a shortened version of "It is going to be raining soon."
: Depending on the rules you have been given, I think I'd vote for Option A
:                                                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: below.   The sentence is not obviously correct grammar, and would probably
: never be used formally in writing.  Hence I'm uncomfortable with Option C.
:                                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: But it isn't exactly incorrect either.  It could make sense in the precise
: context I have mentioned.
: I did not mean option "B" at all, the one where there is a place in which
: rain falls according to schedule.  (Although such a place might be very
: interesting.)
: Would I put it on a national test?   No, I wouldn't.   There is just enough
: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: ambiguity here to make it a question where people who know the language
: ^^^^^^^^^
: backwards and forwards might disagree.
Do you have a category distinguishing being "informal, or colloquial
language" and "formal language"?   Remember, linguistic grammar is NEVER
prescriptive.  If native speakers say something and it is understood, it is
not "incorrect".    It's another thing to say something would work in
"Standard Written English."    Make sense?
: This is all very fascinating!
: ==========================================================
: 2) Dr Luke Prodromou
: 去文：
: Hello,
: Would it be possible to ask Dr Luke Prodromou, the author of Smash, on a
: sentence I found in the Smash 2 grammar worksheets, here:
: http://www.macmillanenglish.com/uploadedFiles/Catalogue/Teenage/Smash/Level_2/Smash%20Grammar%202.pdf
: At the bottom of page 22:
: But we can’t use the present continuous when we are talking about things
: that we think will happen,
: It is going to rain soon. (not: It is raining soon.)
: My question is: Is the sentence that is stricken out here, "It is raining
: soon.", considered incorrect or merely informal by Dr Prodromou (and by
: teachers of English grammar in general)? For the sake of clarity, incorrect
: usages should be avoided on all occasions because they don't follow
: grammatical rules of standard English. Informal usages, on the other hand,
: are not incorrect and can be used in informal situations, such as in a casual
: conversation between friends.
: Regards,
: ------
: 回覆：
: Hello ------
: I have asked the author Dr Prodromou your question. Please see his response
: below. Regards.
: "The sentence 'It's raining soon' , in British English, at least, is
: incorrect; It is not acceptable even in an informal context, if one wishes to
: ^^^^^^^^^        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: conform to British Standard English. There may be varieties of English,
: including L2 English varieties, where it might be acceptable but I don't know
: of any."


→ l10nel:mw4m:你的確需要弄懂perfectly fine. 和 perfectly fine後   02/21 05:08
→ l10nel:接to appear in a scholastic ability test，兩者意思       02/21 05:09
→ l10nel:大有不同，自己誤解、斷章取義卻口出惡言罵人，實在不妥。   02/21 05:11

我有寫appear......' ，表示後面還有點點點，為什麼我這樣是斷章取義？真的
像paulchi大講得一樣，你是不是應該學會看懂別人的話？還是每個人都必須反覆講幾次
你才看得懂？我斷章取義？那你沒有嗎？你劃線的地方才是重點？其他部分就不是重點？
重點是你說得才對，你就不是斷章取義？

我沒有罵人我用問號。

→ l10nel:另外，Prodromou所指的可能存在，是因他自己是專精於標準    02/21 05:42
→ l10nel:英式英語教學，故不能否認在標準L1英式英語之外的各種可     02/21 05:42
→ l10nel:能性。然他最後說，自己並沒聽過有哪種英語裡會接受這句     02/21 05:42
→ l10nel:子的。這是間接暗示：「如果這句話被哪種英語接受，包含     02/21 05:42
→ l10nel:L1美式標準英語和各式各樣的L2英語，我會感到驚訝。」學     02/21 05:43
→ l10nel:者謙虛、不誇飾而有涵養的回應，卻被你拆解得支離破碎。     02/21 05:43
→ l10nel:請你也一樣先瞭解何為L2 English再來斷章取義不急。         02/21 05:43

我今天又去問老師，我把這討論列印給老師看，很訝異老師居然也有上英文板。
他說第二位教授是講如果你要確認標準的英式英語，It's raining soon
的確是不正確，在不正式的語境下也不被接受。但有可能是英語的變體，這變體包含了
(但不僅限於)第二語言為英語的變體(因為這裡用的是非限定用法)，這是有可能被
接受的，因而我並無法掌握任何的可能。

根本不是你講得什麼間接暗示，這是我問老師的，可以在北一女任教的老師不會差吧。不
要以為考生都是呆瓜。

還有這討論只有你在辯論It's raining soon是文法錯，沒有人說它文法百分百正確，
也沒人說它或相信它出在考題是perfectly fine。 信還這樣寫，結果回覆有
全如你意嗎？

不是只有你劃線的地方才是重點。第一位教授的第一段(I think…)與最後一段
(Do you have…)也是重點回話。英語文章第一段與最後一段也算重點段落，這是我
高中生也知道的常識。

可以不要把別人當笨蛋好嗎？


→ zofloya:你這篇文會不會太無知?
→ zofloya:你這篇文會不會太白吃?
→ zofloya:你這篇文會不會太智障?
→ zofloya:你這篇文會不會太腦殘?
→ zofloya:你這篇文會不會太卑鄙?
→ zofloya:你這篇文會不會太機八?
→ zofloya:你這篇文會不會太王八?
→ zofloya:你這篇文會不會太腦補?
→ zofloya:你這篇文會不會太狗屎?
→ zofloya:你這篇文會不會太豬頭?
→ zofloya:你這篇文會不會太無恥?
→ zofloya:你這篇文會不會太下流?
→ zofloya:你這篇文會不會太龌龊?
→ zofloya:你這篇文會不會太犯賤?
推 Soulchild:討論到現在我算有點好奇 你們認為這句話是可以接受的文
→ Soulchild:法 是因為像Watkins所說的把它視作"It's going to be
→ Soulchild:raining soon"嗎? 另外zofloya會不會太誇張?
→ stu60912:若刪節號只是為了「單純」省略字數，那至少在結尾時的字
→ stu60912:要補上，也就是應該要至少寫 XXX... XXX. 但是n大前面寫
→ stu60912:了整整三行，最後用刪節號到結尾。很容易是認為是要強調
→ stu60912:前面，所以後面才通通省略掉的。
推 stu60912:而看下來這討論串似乎要淪為沒必要的謾罵了，版主人呢?
推 Soulchild:其實我覺得l10nel將所有原文都po出來是很好的作法 這樣
→ Soulchild:就不會造成資訊不對稱的問題 因為即便他/她劃線強調了那
→ Soulchild:些部分(而且他/她也有說明那是自己加上去的) 但我們都可
→ Soulchild:以看文章其他部分來判斷是否要認同l10nel的意見 畢竟我
→ Soulchild:們本來就有自己的判斷能力 所以像原po這樣特地回文罵人
→ Soulchild:恐怕有公然侮辱之虞
※ 編輯: nw4m            來自: 119.14.54.39         (02/22 00:54)