English questions

Natural languages and linguistics
Moose-tache
Posts: 1718
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 2:12 am

Re: English questions

Post by Moose-tache »

"For qua as" is up there with "upon qua on." It's recent enough that almost everyone still knows how to use it correctly (as opposed to, say, "thou" or "whom"), but no one uses it in normal conversation unless they're doing a bit.
I did it. I made the world's worst book review blog.
Richard W
Posts: 1373
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2018 12:53 pm

Re: English questions

Post by Richard W »

Moose-tache wrote: Thu Sep 22, 2022 12:31 am "For qua as" is up there with "upon qua on." It's recent enough that almost everyone still knows how to use it correctly (as opposed to, say, "thou" or "whom"), but no one uses it in normal conversation unless they're doing a bit.
Is there a translation tool available for this? While 50% was intelligible, the key parts weren't.
Travis B.
Posts: 5773
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:52 pm

Re: English questions

Post by Travis B. »

Richard W wrote: Thu Sep 22, 2022 12:46 pm
Moose-tache wrote: Thu Sep 22, 2022 12:31 am "For qua as" is up there with "upon qua on." It's recent enough that almost everyone still knows how to use it correctly (as opposed to, say, "thou" or "whom"), but no one uses it in normal conversation unless they're doing a bit.
Is there a translation tool available for this? While 50% was intelligible, the key parts weren't.
I have no idea what "for qua as" or "upon qua on" even means.

As for whom, for me as an adult it is very productive, even though it is at the same time learned because as a kid I did not really know how to use whom "correctly".
Ġëbba nuġmy sik'a läka jälåsåmâxûiri mohhomijekene.
Leka ṙotammy sik'a ġëbbäri mohhomijekëlâṙáisä.
Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa.
User avatar
Raphael
Posts: 3990
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2018 6:36 am

Re: English questions

Post by Raphael »

Travis B. wrote: Thu Sep 22, 2022 12:58 pm I have no idea what "for qua as" or "upon qua on" even means.
Same.
User avatar
Ryusenshi
Posts: 379
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2018 1:57 pm
Location: Somewhere in France

Re: English questions

Post by Ryusenshi »

I understood them as "using the word for with the meaning as", and "using the word upon with the meaning on".
User avatar
Raphael
Posts: 3990
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2018 6:36 am

Re: English questions

Post by Raphael »

Ryusenshi wrote: Thu Sep 22, 2022 2:03 pm I understood them as "using the word for with the meaning as", and "using the word upon with the meaning on".
Ah, thank you.
Moose-tache
Posts: 1718
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 2:12 am

Re: English questions

Post by Moose-tache »

People out here gonna brag they use "for thine is the kingdom" in regular conversation, then act confused when they see qua.
I did it. I made the world's worst book review blog.
Travis B.
Posts: 5773
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:52 pm

Re: English questions

Post by Travis B. »

Moose-tache wrote: Thu Sep 22, 2022 6:29 pm People out here gonna brag they use "for thine is the kingdom" in regular conversation, then act confused when they see qua.
For me thine is very different than for as a conjunction; the latter is rather formal and a tad dated, while the former is really only used when quoting the KJV, Shakespeare, or the Lord's Prayer unless one is in one of those sects which still uses tha. As for qua, that isn't even English as I understand it.
Ġëbba nuġmy sik'a läka jälåsåmâxûiri mohhomijekene.
Leka ṙotammy sik'a ġëbbäri mohhomijekëlâṙáisä.
Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa.
User avatar
Rounin Ryuuji
Posts: 2849
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2020 6:47 pm

Re: English questions

Post by Rounin Ryuuji »

While I understood the qua in context, I hadn't encountered it used before that way either, and would definitely put it in the "not English" category.
zompist
Site Admin
Posts: 2556
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2018 5:46 am
Location: Right here, probably
Contact:

Re: English questions

Post by zompist »

Richard W
Posts: 1373
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2018 12:53 pm

Re: English questions

Post by Richard W »

Moose-tache wrote: Thu Sep 22, 2022 6:29 pm People out here gonna brag they use "for thine is the kingdom" in regular conversation, then act confused when they see qua.
Is it so odd if you have a personal relationship with God? It would be rather odd in conversation between mortals.
Richard W
Posts: 1373
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2018 12:53 pm

Re: English questions

Post by Richard W »

Rounin Ryuuji wrote: Thu Sep 22, 2022 9:01 pm While I understood the qua in context, I hadn't encountered it used before that way either, and would definitely put it in the "not English" category.
Well, it's not a conjunction in Latin, but it can be useful in English. It's also easier to type than 'in the rôle of'. However, it is a word for intellectual conversation, which is what we normally have here.
Travis B.
Posts: 5773
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:52 pm

Re: English questions

Post by Travis B. »

Richard W wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 2:42 pm
Moose-tache wrote: Thu Sep 22, 2022 6:29 pm People out here gonna brag they use "for thine is the kingdom" in regular conversation, then act confused when they see qua.
Is it so odd if you have a personal relationship with God? It would be rather odd in conversation between mortals.
It is odd if you aren't quoting something written at least 400 years ago.
Ġëbba nuġmy sik'a läka jälåsåmâxûiri mohhomijekene.
Leka ṙotammy sik'a ġëbbäri mohhomijekëlâṙáisä.
Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa.
Travis B.
Posts: 5773
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:52 pm

Re: English questions

Post by Travis B. »

Richard W wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 2:45 pm
Rounin Ryuuji wrote: Thu Sep 22, 2022 9:01 pm While I understood the qua in context, I hadn't encountered it used before that way either, and would definitely put it in the "not English" category.
Well, it's not a conjunction in Latin, but it can be useful in English. It's also easier to type than 'in the rôle of'. However, it is a word for intellectual conversation, which is what we normally have here.
I would call it superfluous Latin myself - extra Latin injected into otherwise English-language conversations all for the purpose of making one seem more "intellectual".
Ġëbba nuġmy sik'a läka jälåsåmâxûiri mohhomijekene.
Leka ṙotammy sik'a ġëbbäri mohhomijekëlâṙáisä.
Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa.
User avatar
azhong
Posts: 188
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2022 6:30 pm

Re: English questions

Post by azhong »

I was told that, without more text, the sentence
"I read a book again this month"
can seemingly have two meanings:
  • 1) I read a book last month, and I read another this month.
  • 2) I read a book last month, and I re-read the book this month.
Q: Which interpretation comes to you first? I am wondering if there is a more common understanding on it.
I tried to move "again" to a different position, but it seems to just get a less natural word order and still have two possible meanings.
I read a book this month again.

Thank you, and wish you have a good day.
(Or please also let me know if you do not agree with anything I've mentioned in the post.)
Pls help delete my account if I haven't logged in for more than half a year. Thank you.
Moose-tache
Posts: 1718
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 2:12 am

Re: English questions

Post by Moose-tache »

I would call it superfluous Latin myself - extra Latin injected into otherwise English-language conversations all for the purpose of making one seem more "intellectual".
Sumne ovvendor?
I did it. I made the world's worst book review blog.
zompist
Site Admin
Posts: 2556
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2018 5:46 am
Location: Right here, probably
Contact:

Re: English questions

Post by zompist »

azhong wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 11:03 pm I was told that, without more text, the sentence
"I read a book again this month"
can seemingly have two meanings:
  • 1) I read a book last month, and I read another this month.
  • 2) I read a book last month, and I re-read the book this month.
Q: Which interpretation comes to you first? I am wondering if there is a more common understanding on it.
Yes, you could get either meaning. (Well, the re-reading option would not imply that I first read it last month.)

I think this is pragmatic-- reading a new book is more ordinary than reading the same book again so soon.
Travis B.
Posts: 5773
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:52 pm

Re: English questions

Post by Travis B. »

Moose-tache wrote: Sat Sep 24, 2022 12:01 am
I would call it superfluous Latin myself - extra Latin injected into otherwise English-language conversations all for the purpose of making one seem more "intellectual".
Sumne ovvendor?
Ich verstehe nicht, was das bedeutet, und ich werde das nicht nachlesen.
Ġëbba nuġmy sik'a läka jälåsåmâxûiri mohhomijekene.
Leka ṙotammy sik'a ġëbbäri mohhomijekëlâṙáisä.
Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa. Q'omysa.
zompist
Site Admin
Posts: 2556
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2018 5:46 am
Location: Right here, probably
Contact:

Re: English questions

Post by zompist »

zompist wrote: Sat Sep 24, 2022 12:40 am
azhong wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 11:03 pm I was told that, without more text, the sentence
"I read a book again this month"
can seemingly have two meanings:
  • 1) I read a book last month, and I read another this month.
  • 2) I read a book last month, and I re-read the book this month.
Q: Which interpretation comes to you first? I am wondering if there is a more common understanding on it.
Yes, you could get either meaning. (Well, the re-reading option would not imply that I first read it last month.)

I think this is pragmatic-- reading a new book is more ordinary than reading the same book again so soon.
Adding to this, azhong: the (2) meaning is a little odd because the book should change definiteness, as in the expanded version "I read a book last month,a nd I read the book again this month." Or "...and I read it again this month."
Richard W
Posts: 1373
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2018 12:53 pm

Re: English questions

Post by Richard W »

azhong wrote: Fri Sep 23, 2022 11:03 pm I was told that, without more text, the sentence
"I read a book again this month"
can seemingly have two meanings:
  • 1) I read a book last month, and I read another this month.
  • 2) I read a book last month, and I re-read the book this month.
Q: Which interpretation comes to you first? I am wondering if there is a more common understanding on it.
I tried to move "again" to a different position, but it seems to just get a less natural word order and still have two possible meanings.
I read a book this month again.

Thank you, and wish you have a good day.
(Or please also let me know if you do not agree with anything I've mentioned in the post.)
Neither. I do get 3 meanings out of it, but they are:
  • I don't usually read books, but having read one recently, I read a book this month.
  • This month, I read a book that I had read before.
  • I don't usually read books, but I have read books. I read a book this month.

    The different meanings result in differences in intonation.

    The more strained word order 'I read a book this month again' eliminates the second meaning for me.
Post Reply