Page 1 of 1
it...if
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2005 12:36 am
by Seiichi MYOGA
Do you detect anything that might differenciate the original (1) from the revised (2)?
(1) "It'll give you a gut-ache if you swallow it like that without chewing." Charlie went on wolfing the candy.
(Roald Dahl, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.)
(2) "You'll have a gut-ache if you swallow it like that without chewing."
Charlie went on wolfing the candy.
Thank you in advance
Seiichi MYOGA
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2005 1:05 am
by fluffyhamster
Very little difference in meaning that I can see (speakers might opt for 'get' rather than 'have' in 2) though, to make the cause-effect relationship as clear in 2) as it is in 1); compare *It'll get you a gut-ache... with *You'll give a gut-ache... (note however that You'll give yourself a gut-ache... is OK)).
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2005 2:26 pm
by Seiichi MYOGA
Dear fluffyhamster,
I appreciate your help and comments.
Seiichi MYOGA
Re: it...if
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2005 4:23 pm
by metal56
Seiichi MYOGA wrote:Do you detect anything that might differenciate the original (1) from the revised (2)?
(1) "It'll give you a gut-ache if you swallow it like that without chewing." Charlie went on wolfing the candy.
(Roald Dahl, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.)
(2) "You'll have a gut-ache if you swallow it like that without chewing."
Charlie went on wolfing the candy.
Thank you in advance
Seiichi MYOGA
If we think about how English normally places the most important information toward the front of the sentence... I see the first as focusing on the candy - the "it" in "It'll give you..." being cataphoric (forward looking) reference for "candy". The second focuses more on the swallower, who is placed at the front of the sentence. Otherwise... no difference.
Mind you, some may see the "It'll" in (1) as referring to the act of swallowing.
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2005 11:54 pm
by Seiichi MYOGA
Dear metal56,
I appreciate your help and comments.
I'm surprised that (1) is really ambiguous in that "it" in the main sentence may refer to "the candy" or the content of the "if"-clause (or the act of swallowing the candy like that without chewing).
Seiichi MYOGA
Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:29 am
by fluffyhamster
Seiichi MYOGA wrote:I'm surprised that (1) is really ambiguous in that "it" in the main sentence may refer to "the candy" or the content of the "if"-clause (or the act of swallowing the candy like that without chewing).
Thank goodness for concepts like the 'dummy subject' (it helps dummies like me, anyway)!
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 1:52 am
by Seiichi MYOGA
Hi, Fluffyhamster,
If you hadn't said something, I could have overlooked something.
What about if we reverse the word order of the main and subordinate clause in (1)?
(1) "It'll give you a gut-ache if you swallow it like that without chewing." Charlie went on wolfing the candy.
(Roald Dahl, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.)
I think you'd say that now there's no ambiguity about the reference of "it": it correctly (expectedly) refers to the content of the "if"-clause only.
(3) "If you swallow it like that without chewing, it will give you a gut-ache."
Charlie went on wolfing the candy.
Seiichi MYOGA