She is going to sleep

[metal56]

Are you still ranting on? I've been down the beach, had a swim and a beer in a lovely terrace. Sorry I missed your rant.

Yeah, yeah, sure, sure, you're the coolest guy on the planet, and we all just really dig the groovy vibe you bring to this site. Now that you're back, though, and have posted on this very thread, you can't really have missed what I wrote, can you? But then, I've long since given up on you being able to express a coherent let alone halfway-relevant thought.

Zzzzz! BTW, who is/are the "we" you speak of/for above?

[fluffyhamster]

Zzzzz! BTW, who is/are the "we" you speak of/for above?

Turning the question around, do you really think that there are many people who think you're in the right whenever you "take me to task", metal? That is, these threads that I start do sometimes draw some genuine, interested replies, at least until you appear, and I can't recall a single instance of anyone congratulating you for "having a go" (at me). (Of course, people don't exactly keep on responding to what I've written either, but then, your interruptions have probably left a bad taste in people's mouths and contributed that bit more to the likely feeling that these boards are no longer a very welcoming, tolerant or humourous place. I know my threads aren't always themselves exactly light or fun reading, but until somebody here - somebody other than you, that is - tells me I really need to "get a life", I'll continue to assume that I'm a welcome presence on these, the "Teacher Discussion" forums).

'Nuff said.

[metal56]

'Nuff said.

I doubt that.

[fluffyhamster]

'Nuff said.

I doubt that.

No, really, I kid you not etc.

[revel]

Hey all.

If "go to sleep" is an idiomatic expression that means the regular loss of waking consciousness, for example what most of us do when we lay our heads on the pillow, then "She is going to sleep" seems to me to be the present continuous, that is, she is presently in the process of entering first-stage sleep.

If she has plans to catch 40 winks this afternoon, then "What's she going to do? She's going to sleep", that is, her plans are sleep, and so it's a future with previous plans reflected by the be+going+to+root construction.

This is what I would explain to a student who is studying this sentence.

peace,
revel.

[JuanTwoThree]

OK. Your second main paragraph makes perfect sense and any another verb could be substituted for "sleep".

But the structure in your first paragraph does seem to be a bit of a one-off. There is the ultimately trivial question of what part of speech that "sleep" is.

So nit-picking. When my wife says "Are you going to work?" she normally means "to your place of work" so the "to" parses as a preposition. It's my boss who says "Are you going to work?" where "to" is the infinitive marker.

I submit that "I am going to sleep" in its meaning as described in your first paragraph often means "to the state of sleep" and the "to" is a preposition (similar to: to bed, to prison, to work, to school, to hospital: countables in the singular without article to convey the function of the destination) .

"Don't go to sleep" "I'm going to go to sleep" and "He went to sleep" seem to bear out the contention that there it's a noun.

It's very contextual though: "I'm going to bed but I'm not going to sleep" seems a common-or-garden "going to future" whereas "Aah, she's going to sleep" is, if you ask me, not - if and when it means "from awakeness to sleep".

I'd probably keep quiet about it in a class because in that context it is and had better be a future: What are you going to do after the class? etc

Because if anybody's students do go to sleep (noun) in their classes then you've got far more pressing problems than worrying about these minutiae.

[metal56]

Hey all.

If "go to sleep" is an idiomatic expression that means the regular loss of waking consciousness, for example what most of us do when we lay our heads on the pillow, then "She is going to sleep" seems to me to be the present continuous, that is, she is presently in the process of entering first-stage sleep.

If she has plans to catch 40 winks this afternoon, then "What's she going to do? She's going to sleep", that is, her plans are sleep, and so it's a future with previous plans reflected by the be+going+to+root construction.

This is what I would explain to a student who is studying this sentence.

peace,
revel.

Me too, but Fluffy would not even discuss it with a student.

[metal56]

<So nit-picking. When my wife says "Are you going to work?" she normally means "to your place of work" so the "to" parses as a preposition. It's my boss who says "Are you going to work?" where "to" is the infinitive marker. >

And if your wife says "Are you going to work now?" "I was hoping that we would sit down and watch a film together".

<But the structure in your first paragraph does seem to be a bit of a one-off.>

And is that a problem? Novel usage appears each day.

<It's very contextual though: "I'm going to bed but I'm not going to sleep" seems a common-or-garden "going to future" whereas "Aah, she's going to sleep" is, if you ask me, not - if and when it means "from awakeness to sleep". >


<"I'm going to bed but I'm not going to sleep">

How would you explain this?

"I'm going to bed, but I'm sure I'm not going to sleep."

"I'm going to bed, but I feel I'm not going to sleep"

"I'm going to bed, but I know I won't sleep."

All three mean the same and all are fairly common in my experience of English.

[JuanTwoThree]

Think of a pilot denying that s/he is dropping off:

I'm not going to sleep. I'm wide awake.

Or my wife:

John, you're going to sleep in that armchair. Go to bed.


Which are not:

If i drink any more coffee I'm not going to* sleep.

Look into my eyes. You're going to* sleep for a week.

(or: You're not going to bed. You're going to* sleep in that armchair!)

Your first two examples:

"I'm going to bed, but I'm sure I'm not going to* sleep."

"I'm going to bed, but I feel I'm not going to* sleep"

though ambiguous are most likely like the above: it's possible to substitute will/won't here* with only the change in meaning which that involves.

It's also possible that in your examples

"I'm going to bed, but I'm sure I'm not going to sleep."

"I'm going to bed, but I feel I'm not going to sleep"

that "I'm not going to sleep" mean "here and now" and are a denial that the speaker is nodding off before going to bed.

The point I'm making is that sometimes these are clearly not "going to" futures. They are present continuous form of "go to sleep", an expression which seems to be productive in that it can be used in all tenses, whereas "going to" futures only seem to have limited other tenses (eg I was going to say that, I've been going to do it for ages), all formed with "be", so certainly "went to" is not one of them. "I went to sleep in my armchair" is either a form of "go to sleep" or the "went" is another root "went" (I changed position in order to sleep)

If it is a novel form then it's not a problem, it's a cause for rejoicing.

My question remains: What part of speech might the "sleep" of "go to sleep" be? I think it's a noun but I don't lose sleep over it.

One possible clincher is that "I'm going to go to sleep" is possible. As far as I can see that makes it a preposition and a noun.

What and how much would I explain to students? I'd have to be there to answer that question. Sometimes you explain, sometimes you dodge it or fudge it, sometimes you plain lie. It depends on too many factors: the group, the level, the weather, the fact that it's not very important etcetera, to safely say what might happen on the day.

What that "work" is in "Are you going to work now?" has to depend on the speaker's knowledge of the situation:

A gardener might be asked "Are you going to bed?" . A group of dolphins might be asked "Are you going to school?" "A ceramicist might be asked "Are you going to pot?"

[metal56]

Think of a pilot denying that s/he is dropping off:

I'm not going to sleep. I'm wide awake.

Or my wife:

John, you're going to sleep in that armchair. Go to bed.

Is the second example the same as:


John, you're falling asleep in that armchair. Go to bed.

Or is it:



John, you're going to end up sleeping in that armchair all night. Go to bed.

<I've been going to do it for ages), all formed with "be", so certainly "went to" is not one of them. "I went to sleep in my armchair" is either a form of "go to sleep" or the "went" is another root "went" (I changed position in order to sleep) >

Yes, both are possible:

I went to sleep in my armchair (in order) to escape the noise and chatter. (Same as; "I'm going (from this location to another) in order to sleep in my armchair.")

I fell asleep/went to sleep in my armchair (because I was bored by all the noise and chatter.

What that "work" is in "Are you going to work now?" has to depend on the speaker's knowledge of the situation:

Yes, I agree with that. Inference is all. Well, almost.

[fluffyhamster]

Revel, nice to have you back! Hmm, explaining or discussing such an example with a student who is 'studying' this sentence? I'm not completely opposed to that (metal - once again you've mischaracterized my position entirely), provided we're clear that the example has been produced or unearthed by the student, and not foisted upon them by a teacher who's not thought things through much; but let's be honest now, who can really see many students totally following a discussion of the sort we're seeing here (regardless of whatever polite interest and nods they may exhibit)? (Kudos to JTT for the thoughts and examples, though). Students presumably ultimately want clear guidance on how to say things "right", be optimally effective in their communication, and this leads in the final analysis to a necessary consideration of the clear and attestable over the murky and merely formally possible (it's that whole performance versus competence dichotomy).

Back to you, revvers. I find it hard to imagine people saying 'I'm going to sleep (this afternoon, dammit!)', mainly because going to sleep is not normally a difficult process requiring much intentionality, planning, willpower, "stating/bolstering of intent through mantra-like repetition to yourself and informing others" etc (one could of course say 'I'm going to have a sleep/nap etc' - see the 'alternative exponents' that I suggested on page one of this thread; and the delexical process here, where verb becomes noun, might also be seen at "work" in, 'Are you going to do any work/get any work done' versus JTT's 'Are you going to work?'). Perhaps somebody could search a corpus of insomniacs' speech (assuming their slurring of their syllables would make transcription possible). But I'll admit that one could say that one, or another person, is 'going to sleep for hours and hours/like a log etc'. The question then is whether this is a prediction or one's planned intention: the two seem functionally distinct, and it might be unwise to blur the distinction in the mind of a student by suggesting that 'I am going to sleep' in and of itself conveys anything very meaningful (certainly not a clear plan), hence my suggesting alternative exponents.

Following on from insomnia, OK, people can PREDICT they 'won't (get much) sleep/sleep (much)' (again, intention, planning etc doesn't really enter into it) - I'm not too hung up on what POS it is exactly, and I wonder if it really matters (one thing that does seem of some import is the role that adverbs - 'for hours', or 'much', both above, have in changing the meaning to 'future' as opposed to 'now'); the point still is rather that a simple positive statement sounds odd, and the recontextualizations (or changes of verb, from 'sleep' to 'work' etc) haven't quite solved the "problem" (of knowing when to call a halt to the "productivity" form-, yet not quite function-wise, we're trying to demonstrate in the language we accept from, or especially, present to students) - I mean, there seems to be an underlying tendency (a desire even?) amoung us here to present 'be going to' as having at least 'intention' (besides its 'imminent' and/or 'predictive' aspects), and a clear form of intention at that.

[JuanTwoThree]

Yeah but no but.

That seems to be settled. metal56, you'd have to ask the speaker about:

"Is the second example the same as:

John, you're falling asleep in that armchair. Go to bed.

Or is it:

John, you're going to end up sleeping in that armchair all night. Go to bed."

I was trying for a context where it was most likely to be the "you're falling asleep" but I see now that I didn't completely succeed. Which proves my point that the slipperiness of this depends on having the extra info.

Perhaps we could get away from "sleep" for all these above reasons.

Fluffyhamster, where I take issue with you is that interchanges do in fact take place between learners which are emphatically not like:

"Are you going to get any work done?" "I doubt it mate"

or whatever "people" really say.

So S1 asks S2 in impeccable though unadorned English "What are you doing this afternoon?" and S2 replies "I'm going to work". It's also what "people say". So it's not crystal clear. I let them get on with it. Mostly. Point out the ambiguity and propose better alternatives?

However laudable it might be for them to know and produce a plethora of "falling asleep, nodding off, going to go to work, get some work done, put in a few hours" and so on, they in fact put together in simple combinations the words they already know, leading to these ambiguities.

It might be preferable to hear "I'm going to do some work" as against "I'm going to go to work" but we're faced with a type of English which is inelegant but crudely functional (perhaps they are at work so "I'm going to work" has only the one meaning anyway).

You're right, it's the old argument. But this murky, unrealistic though formally possible English does exist. It certainly exists in other languages:

My clutch isn't working properly. I didn't know how to say revs (revolutions per minute) so how I explained myself was formally correct Spanish but had never been said before, I shouldn't wonder. And I really didn't need to know (though now I do). My neighbour says "John, sometimes you say things that we understand completely and there are no mistakes, but it's just that nobody else ever says it like that" So am I a failure or a success?

[fluffyhamster]

JTT, obviously we can't control what learners say, especially to other learners once they've all finished their classes, down to the last word, and nor should we: I've never been an advocate for teaching too idiomatic language when reductive paraphrases can be formulated (paraphrases that might appeal to a learner's intuition more than the native-speaker alternatives). But are delexical verbs really that idiomatic? They might well be be more appealing than murkiness.

Anyway, there's always the temptation to make the trickier items (which can often seem like anything and everything even vaguely collocational lying beyond the reassuring but semantically empty lists of structures and discrete vocabulary!) the learner's responsibility (to learn) - they could form hypotheses and test them, even consult corpora themselves, for every "little" thing, eh! But what seems so empowering to the student and time-saving for the teacher (this handing over of responsibility) might actually end up resulting in exactly the opposite (excuse me whilst I paint an exaggerated picture here): confused, even demoralized students eating up everyone's time with almost neurotic questions about all manner of points, some of which could've been better anticipated (or in fact avoided altogether LOL).

Personally, I can't myself ever see the teacher being excused the always potentially interesting but nevertheless quite grim grind of thrashing out what forms exactly the input (potentially, masses of it, in a more thorough course) "should" take (in the interests of clarity/learnability), partly because ultimately a lot of what we teach is unavoidably what we ourselves as individuals do or would say (or imagine our peers at least would say, when we haven't the time to do more than consult our own intuitions); so, just as we gradually extend more respect to a student's developing intuition, equally we should never lose sight of our own and become slaves to corpora, what "other people" always say (that being said, it is undeniable that corpora provide indispensible insights into the "average/sum intuition" of the community/-ies sampled). A balance can I believe be found (indeed, any halfway decent teacher will soon find it and continue running with it).

My clutch isn't working properly. I didn't know how to say revs (revolutions per minute) so how I explained myself was formally correct Spanish but had never been said before, I shouldn't wonder. And I really didn't need to know (though now I do). My neighbour says "John, sometimes you say things that we understand completely and there are no mistakes, but it's just that nobody else ever says it like that" So am I a failure or a success?

I'd say without a doubt that you're a success: the key is that 'we understand completely' - forget the 'but it's just that nobody else ever says it like that'. But this is a different kettle of fish from sentences that make ESL teachers at least (perhaps not the best people to ask, but then who else would be instead?) pause for thought, not least because we're talking about your presumably one-off improvisations, versus considered pedagogical decisions that would affect at the very least the number of students you'd have in your classes and the sort of language the majority of them will be trying out, honing and refining. Why give them unrefined or less refined to process (but I also appreciate that ambiguity can't always be avoided. I just want the ambiguity to be genuine, attested, not made up just for the sake of it - like I said before, it's not like we're talking titillating double-entendres here).

BTW, in my previous post I wrote:

...(one thing that does seem of some import is the role that adverbs - 'for hours', or 'much', both above, have in changing the meaning to 'future' as opposed to 'now')...

What I should have said is that where an adverb (including 'now') is unstated i.e. 'I am going to sleep', no futurity is read into it (we seem to be agreeing it is present progressive, although I would still maintain that the phrasing upon investigation would likely more often than not be something other than 'going to sleep' e.g. 'am so sleepy/am falling asleep/am nodding off here' etc); and where e.g. 'now' is stated, it assumes futurity (who can fall asleep instantaneously, as the very words die on their lips?!), not that 'sleep' would be preferable to saying 'bed' (desperate insomniacs excepted).

One last thing, what seemed less than 5% of the occurences of SLEEP in the OALDCE6 were "verby" (i.e. the overwhelming majority were to do with the noun), and I don't recall seeing many (if any) in a be going to construction (I should check again though). Of course, a dictionary isn't truly representative, but assuming a learner could memorize all the usable examples within it, would you say that such a learner were missing some degree of competence for not being able to crank out 'sleep' with be going to aspects? If so, which of the examples offered in this thread would you be selecting to fill what you would perceive as holes? Me, I quite like those negative predictions ('I'm not going to be able to sleep, with all this floating around in me noggin').

[metal56]

fluffyhamster wrote:


'Nuff said.

[metal56]

Revel, nice to have you back! Hmm, explaining or discussing such an example with a student who is 'studying' this sentence? I'm not completely opposed to that (metal - once again you've mischaracterized my position entirely), provided we're clear that the example has been produced or unearthed by the student, and not foisted upon them by a teacher who's not thought things through much; but let's be honest now, who can really see many students totally following a discussion of the sort we're seeing here (regardless of whatever polite interest and nods they may exhibit)? (Kudos to JTT for the thoughts and examples, though). Students presumably ultimately want clear guidance on how to say things "right", be optimally effective in their communication, and this leads in the final analysis to a necessary consideration of the clear and attestable over the murky and merely formally possible (it's that whole performance versus competence dichtomy).

Back to you, revvers. I find it hard to imagine people saying 'I'm going to sleep (this afternoon, dammit!)', mainly because going to sleep is not normally a difficult process requiring much intentionality, planning, willpower, "stating/bolstering of intent through mantra-like repetition to yourself and informing others" etc (one could of course say 'I'm going to have a sleep/nap etc' - see the 'alternative exponents' that I suggested on page one of this thread; and the delexical process here, where verb becomes noun, might also be seen at "work" in, 'Are you going to do any work/get any work done' versus JTT's 'Are you going to work?'). Perhaps somebody could search a corpus of insomniacs' speech (assuming their slurring of their syllables would make transcription possible). But I'll admit that one could say that one, or another person, is 'going to sleep for hours and hours/like a log etc'. The question then is whether this is a prediction or one's planned intention: the two seem functionally distinct, and it might be unwise to blur the distinction in the mind of a student by suggesting that 'I am going to sleep' in and of itself conveys anything very meaningful (certainly not a clear plan), hence my suggesting alternative exponents.

Following on from insomnia, OK, people can PREDICT they 'won't (get much) sleep/sleep (much)' (again, intention, planning etc doesn't really enter into it) - I'm not too hung up on what POS it is exactly, and I wonder if it really matters (one thing that does seem of some import is the role that adverbs - 'for hours', or 'much', both above, have in changing the meaning to 'future' as opposed to 'now'); the point still is rather that a simple positive statement sounds odd, and the recontextualizations (or changes of verb, from 'sleep' to 'work' etc) haven't quite solved the "problem" (of knowing when to call a halt to the "productivity" form-, yet not quite function-wise, we're trying to demonstrate in the language we accept from, or especially, present to students) - I mean, there seems to be an underlying tendency (a desire even?) amoung us here to present 'be going to' as having at least 'intention' (besides its 'imminent' and/or 'predictive' aspects), and a clear form of intention at that.

(metal - once again you've mischaracterized my position entirely),

Your posts are far from clear.

who can really see many students totally following a discussion of the sort we're seeing here (regardless of whatever polite interest and nods they may exhibit)?

Again you show that you have a different expectation of and experience with students. I have many students who have both the language and intelligence to follow such a discussion as this. Again and again you speak from your little world of experience.

I find it hard to imagine people saying 'I'm going to sleep (this afternoon, dammit!)', mainly because going to sleep is not normally a difficult process requiring much intentionality, planning, willpower,

Fluff, if only you could state that you find it hard to imagine that people do say such things as "I'm going to sleep tonite, and dammit!" and leave it at that. What is it you are trying to convince us of here? Do you want to say that such use has or will NEVER happen? If so, as a native speaker, I tell you again that it does happen and is fairly common in my experience.

If you find that hard to imagine, then fine, but don't keep telling us that we have/would never heard/hear such. Just accept that you haven't yet come across such use.

<going to sleep is not normally a difficult process requiring much intentionality, planning, willpower,>

Do you have children? Noisy neighbours? Stressed about paying bills or worried about the health of a family member? Sleep is not easily achieved by all, you know?

From ME. My life at present:

"I can't go on this way night after night. I sit up worrying about my son and his job. Tonight, I'm going to get a full night's sleep even if it kills me."

(Planning, intention and willpower all intended there. Of course, one could intend that statement as a prediction, but that was not MY intention.)

'I am going to sleep' in and of itself conveys anything very meaningful (certainly not a clear plan), hence my suggesting alternative exponents.

And to students, many "in and of itself" items of language do not convey anything meaningful, but to a native speaker they might.

So:

I'm going to sleep reading this thread.

You work out which meaning was intended there. For me, it's now a dead thread.