I'm here....a week now?

Metamorfose · Post by **Metamorfose** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 12:08 pm

The other day I was watching Apocalypse Now and this sentence came up at the very beginning of the film and it caught my attention.

I'm here a week now.

Have I missed something or should it be I've been here a week now?

Thanks

José

joshua2004 · Post by **joshua2004** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 12:59 pm

The grammar for written and spoken English is different. I imagine there is some allowance for missing words in spoken grammar that are implied, but I don't know.

JuanTwoThree · Post by **JuanTwoThree** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 1:09 pm

You're right.

The quote's a one-time use even in the dodgy world of Google and its dangers of loads of L1 influenced Franglais, Spanglish (which it could easily be), Chinglish etc

The phrase googles 115 times, of which 85 are the Apocalypse Now quote "I'm here a week now, waiting for a mission"

Of the thirty remaining most seem to be semi-quoting the above.

No hits for the equivalent with "day" and the hits with "month" and "year" are clearly versions of the quote.

Which could happen in a script if you imagine the pauses:

"I'm.......... here a week now...... waiting for a mission"

though I don't think it's like that in the film.

So it's a one off. Not standard English nor even standard Un-English.

Metamorfose · Post by **Metamorfose** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 1:41 pm

Thanks JJT

How could we call this, such a very extraordianary utterance?

This sentence goes beyond the "Present Prefect x Past Simple" nuances for example, where we here could discuss the extra-linguistic situations and hypothetise on it. What really beats me is the fact that the character is not a speaker of a Romance Language, where such utterance might be normal coming from learners or people who hasn't mastered the English system so well, so my question is how could one even say such a one-off, isn't it like saying "I'm leaving yesterday"?

PS: By no means I'm trying to point to a 'mistake' nor do I intend to be a prescriptive grammarian, I just want to understand this particular utterance and no, this is not a 'slip of the tongue'.

José

Metamorfose · Post by **Metamorfose** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 1:46 pm

joshua2004 wrote

The grammar for written and spoken English is different. I imagine there is some allowance for missing words in spoken grammar that are implied, but I don't know.

Yeah but if it was like this he would have said something like "I...been here for a week now" or the like I guess, the snag is the usage of the present simple for the retrospective aspect.

José

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 5:56 pm

JuanTwoThree wrote:You're right.

Which could happen in a script if you imagine the pauses:

"I'm.......... here a week now...... waiting for a mission"

though I don't think it's like that in the film.

So it's a one off. Not standard English nor even standard Un-English.

Here's the extract from the film:

Similar to:

Willard: [voiceover] Saigon... *beep*; I'm still only in Saigon... Every time I think I'm gonna wake up back in the jungle. When I was home after my first tour, it was worse. I'd wake up and there'd be nothing. I hardly said a word to my wife, until I said "yes" to a divorce. When I was here, I wanted to be there; when I was there, all I could think of was getting back into the jungle. I'm here a week now... waiting for a mission... getting softer; every minute I stay in this room, I get weaker, and every minute Charlie squats in the bush, he gets stronger. Each time I looked around, the walls moved in a little tighter.

If Willard has just arrived and has to stay for a week before the mission, isn't "I'm here a week now" ("now" meaning "this time") correct?

How long ar you here for/going to be here for?

Nope, just checked the story and Willard has already been in Saigon for a week at the time of the utterance. Ah, well.

moonchild7903 · Post by **moonchild7903** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:31 pm

I agree with an earlier post about the difference between the conventions of written and spoken English. Spoken English seems to be more syntactically forgiving and any inconsistencies in syntax may be attributed to the context in which is was spoken.

Once the utterance has been written of course, the context will no longer be visible and the language will have to strictly follow the conventions in order to be acceptable.

Metamorfose · Post by **Metamorfose** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 9:10 pm

I agree with an earlier post about the difference between the conventions of written and spoken English. Spoken English seems to be more syntactically forgiving and any inconsistencies in syntax may be attributed to the context in which is was spoken.

I agree with that but how many native speakers (it doesn't matter where they come from and their educational background) will utter such a structure: Present Simple + a week (a month/ a day) now?

How long have you been here?
* I'm here a week now.

José

fluffyhamster · Post by **fluffyhamster** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 9:29 pm

Metamorfose wrote:how many native speakers (it doesn't matter where they come from and their educational background) will utter such a structure: Present Simple + a week (a month/ a day) now?

How long have you been here?
* I'm here a week now.

Very few, nor will that many feel absolutely compelled to use a subject and "mirroring" verb phrase ('I've been here a week now') when they can just say, 'Oh, about a week' (>ellipsis). Let's also not forget that Willard (Sheen) wasn't answering a question, so he could pretty much say what he liked.

moonchild wrote:Once the utterance has been written of course, the context will no longer be visible and the language will have to strictly follow the conventions in order to be acceptable.

Hmm, I don't know, writing can be "informal" and the context relatively easy to reconstruct (imagine we are reading a diary by someone called 'Willard', written more or less as metal has presented it, and that the novel and movie had never existed); and Sheen is repeating something that was written to be said (i.e. the film's script). That being said, the division between speech and wiring is obviously a useful one to make when a text (and its lexicogrammar) is clearly one or the other (e.g. a transcript of a conversation versus a stuffy text on economics).

metal56 · Post by **metal56** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 10:51 pm

I found this:

.....Imperial City! Damn! I'm still only in I.C.!
Everytime I think I'm gonna wake-up back in the
jungle.
I'm here a few turns now, waiting for a mission,
getting softer.
Every minute I spend here in this city I get weaker,
and every minute another faction hunkers down in the
wilderness it gets stronger........
Each time I looked around, the walls moved in a little
tighter.
-- Captain Willard--

So which is the real one?

Metamorfose · Post by **Metamorfose** » Thu Dec 22, 2005 11:47 pm

Very few, nor will that many feel absolutely compelled to use a subject and "mirroring" verb phrase ('I've been here a week now') when they can just say, 'Oh, about a week' (>ellipsis). Let's also not forget that Willard (Sheen) wasn't answering a question, so he could pretty much say what he liked.

Bad example of mine, but I think you understand what I meant.

José

fluffyhamster · Post by **fluffyhamster** » Fri Dec 23, 2005 5:59 am

Metamorfose wrote:Bad example of mine, but I think you understand what I meant.

Sure - you did after all use an asterisk!