Do the following all work and mean nearly the same thing?
1-1. It annoys me that she dominates the conversation.
1-2. It annoys me because she dominates the conversation.
1-3. It annoys me when she dominates the conversation.
2-1. I am annoyed that she dominates the conversation.
2-2. I am annoyed because she dominates the conversation.
2-3. I am annoyed when she dominates the conversation.
Thank you.
be annoyed that...
Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2
-
fluffyhamster
- Posts: 3031
- Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
- Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
There are subtle differences in meaning:
1-1. It annoys me that she (always, invariably) dominates the conversation.
1-2. It annoys me because she dominates the conversation. ('It' is not 'her dominating the conversation' but something that allows her to do so e.g. another student never saying anything to interrupt her neverending monologues - you therefore find the quiet student the most annoying thing...although doubtless the very talkative student is also annoying too!
)
1-3. It annoys me when (if and when, versus 1-1 above) she dominates the conversation.
2-1. I am annoyed that she dominates the conversation. (Similar to 1-1 above)
2-2. I am annoyed because she dominates conversation. (This could be an answer to the question, 'You seem angry, what's wrong?', but a proper noun rather than the pronoun 'she' would then be better, unless the reference of 'she' could be inferred from the context. NOT similar to 1-2 above)
2-3. I am annoyed when she dominates the conversation. (Similar to 1-3 above).
I reckon we might start a conversation by just saying 'X dominates (the) conversations (we have in class)' or 'X is very forceful/opinionated etc, isn't she' whilst pulling a face, see how our listener reacts, and then "negotiate" a common (shared) view of her as a "bad conversationalist", but 1-1 and 2-1 would be fine as more "midway" contributions to a chat concerning this woman. Same kind of thing with the 1-3 and 2-3 "pair".
1-1. It annoys me that she (always, invariably) dominates the conversation.
1-2. It annoys me because she dominates the conversation. ('It' is not 'her dominating the conversation' but something that allows her to do so e.g. another student never saying anything to interrupt her neverending monologues - you therefore find the quiet student the most annoying thing...although doubtless the very talkative student is also annoying too!
)1-3. It annoys me when (if and when, versus 1-1 above) she dominates the conversation.
2-1. I am annoyed that she dominates the conversation. (Similar to 1-1 above)
2-2. I am annoyed because she dominates conversation. (This could be an answer to the question, 'You seem angry, what's wrong?', but a proper noun rather than the pronoun 'she' would then be better, unless the reference of 'she' could be inferred from the context. NOT similar to 1-2 above)
2-3. I am annoyed when she dominates the conversation. (Similar to 1-3 above).
I reckon we might start a conversation by just saying 'X dominates (the) conversations (we have in class)' or 'X is very forceful/opinionated etc, isn't she' whilst pulling a face, see how our listener reacts, and then "negotiate" a common (shared) view of her as a "bad conversationalist", but 1-1 and 2-1 would be fine as more "midway" contributions to a chat concerning this woman. Same kind of thing with the 1-3 and 2-3 "pair".
Thank you.
Thank you very much for the detailed explanation.