View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
dyak

Joined: 25 Jun 2003 Posts: 630
|
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2005 1:01 am Post subject: Prepositions are too much fun... |
|
|
In a formal sense, when applying for a job for example.
I'm interested at the prospect of -ing
or
I'm interested in the prospect of -ing
or
I'm interested by the prospect of -ing
or are all three ok?
Can they be used universally or does it depend on context?
Cheers |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
matttheboy

Joined: 01 Jul 2003 Posts: 854 Location: Valparaiso, Chile
|
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2005 2:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'd use 'by' and 'in' interchangeably without noticing but would never use 'at'. Although i have an idea that i'd use 'by' if i thought there was a slightly stronger chance of the prospect actually happening. Just a gut feeling, feel free to disagree...  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Glenski

Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Posts: 12844 Location: Hokkaido, JAPAN
|
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2005 2:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
According to Swan, only the second one is correct.
Personally, I found the other two to be unnatural sounding. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
basiltherat
Joined: 04 Oct 2003 Posts: 952
|
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2005 7:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
frankly, our prepositions are dreadful. theyre a real nightmare for students of any other language. inconsistency is the rule.
yesterday :
Abdul; "My mother is married with a businessman."
Teacher: Actually, Abdul, we should say married 'to'. A man is married 'to' a woman. Try again !
Abdul: But teacher ... why ???
Teacher: That's just the way it is.
Abdul: ??????
Thank God that in the majority of cases there is no misunderstanding.
basil |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Stephen Jones
Joined: 21 Feb 2003 Posts: 4124
|
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2005 10:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
"interested in" has over 5,500 hits on the byu concordance compared to a mere 22 for intersted by. Swan seems to have got this one right.
Incidentally Basil, I fail to see why English prepostions are any more of a nightmare for the learner than prepositions in any other language.
You just have to learn 'married to' as a lexical item, exactly as you would learn 'casado con' if you were learning Spanish.
No more illogical than saying 'bread' in one language and 'pan' in another. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
basiltherat
Joined: 04 Oct 2003 Posts: 952
|
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2005 11:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, point taken but ,while not strictly a preposition in grammatical terms, though, students find such expressions as filling out a form and filling in a form (having the same meaning) as quite ridiculous.
In fact, our son recently sent me a long list of such complexities of English language. Think he found it on the internet somewhere. Deleted it though. I'll ask him to resend it and post it here. It was quite amusing.
basil |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Stephen Jones
Joined: 21 Feb 2003 Posts: 4124
|
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2005 1:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Only ridiculous because they are breaking the lexical item into two parts (verb + preposition) instead of treating it as a whole.
We see nothing ridiculous about 'start' and 'begin' having the same meaning even though they do not have a letter in common. The problem is that we are treating phrasal verbs as grammatical items instead of lexical ones. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Glenski

Joined: 15 Jan 2003 Posts: 12844 Location: Hokkaido, JAPAN
|
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2005 2:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
students find such expressions as filling out a form and filling in a form (having the same meaning) as quite ridiculous.
|
Actually, there IS a difference.
You fill OUT a form (the whole thing).
You fill IN a portion of it (a space or empty box, for example). |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
valley_girl

Joined: 22 Sep 2004 Posts: 272 Location: Somewhere in Canada
|
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2005 2:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with Glenski. Also consider this: you "fill in" the blanks but you can't "fill out" the blanks. "Fill out" seems to suggest completing an entire document/report/application. Mind you, I haven't looked it up.  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
dyak

Joined: 25 Jun 2003 Posts: 630
|
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2005 2:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's interesting, 'fill out', in that sense is not really used in British English, we would just use fill in for both.
'Fill out' is used here to suggest that someone is getting fatter or more rotund, as it were, and probably in American English too. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
poro
Joined: 04 Oct 2004 Posts: 274
|
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2005 3:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Glenski wrote: |
Quote: |
students find such expressions as filling out a form and filling in a form (having the same meaning) as quite ridiculous.
|
Actually, there IS a difference.
You fill OUT a form (the whole thing).
You fill IN a portion of it (a space or empty box, for example). |
That's American English, Glenski - in British English you can say "Fill in the form" and unless you say only a part of it, it does mean the whole form.
Both expressions are in general use, and neither can be misunderstood, so I fail to see a difference. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
dmb

Joined: 12 Feb 2003 Posts: 8397
|
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2005 3:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm confused. I think I would ask my students to fill out the form but to fill it in. Does it make a diffrenece if you use a noun or pronoun? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
poro
Joined: 04 Oct 2004 Posts: 274
|
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2005 4:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
dmb wrote: |
I'm confused. I think I would ask my students to fill out the form but to fill it in. Does it make a diffrenece if you use a noun or pronoun? |
I think fill in is more logical, because it implies something is missing, and therefore requires something to be entered (in).
Would you 'fill in' or 'fill out' a hole? - you'd fill it in, of course. That's the logic I see.
But Germans use the expression Ausf�llen - meaning 'fill out' - and perhaps others too, so maybe it comes from there? (And like Americans, they don't use the same expression for filling in holes!) |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
basiltherat
Joined: 04 Oct 2003 Posts: 952
|
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2005 5:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
getting back to the point, though, i still believe that english preposition usage is relatively hard to master. consider the fact, for example, that in indonesian/malay we use the same preposition for time,day, month and year - pada - whereas in english one has to select the correct one from 3 (in, on or at). clearly, by using the wrong one wud not in most cases damage fundemental communication nevertheless, it wud be considered wrong.
also for places e.g buildings, towns, cities, countries and more exact locations such as corner and edge, malay mostly uses just one preposition - di -while in in english, ... well ........
id be interested to know which other languages have more than one preposition for different locations and times.
basil
just going off at a tangent here,
in malay, upside down, wrong way round. inside out and back to front are all translated into indonesian/maly as terbalik. it always used to amuse me when i put my jacket on inside out, upside down and back to front and asked them in what way i was wearing the jacket. the response was usually 'crazy' |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
poro
Joined: 04 Oct 2004 Posts: 274
|
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2005 5:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
basiltherat wrote: |
getting back to the point, though, i still believe that english preposition usage is relatively hard to master. |
It's hard for people who don't have prepositions, or very few, in their language, Basil |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|