Search results for 'tag:Direct questions tag:Clauses' matching tags 'Direct questions' and 'Clauses'

Re: ..why do I have vs ..why I have

CalifJim — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 02:03:14 GMT

EagerSeeker
My Oxford Practical English Usage tells that it is possible to form short
questions without " do", for example:
- Have you an appointment? (formal BrE)
- Do you have an appoinment? (AmE/BrE)

This variant is only possible with the verb have. It is irrelevant to your other concern.

The verb have aside, generally speaking, use do(es) for direct questions, that is, when the entire sentence is a question; otherwise, don't use do(es), as when the clause is embedded in a larger sentence.

Re: If you (will)

CalifJim — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 17:13:12 GMT

Mr Wordy
I realised later that this is a rubbish explanation for why "will" is natural here.

OK. So let's move on and tell the real reason why will is natural here!

see who is there.

see what can be done

see how it's done

see where they put the keys

see whether they will give me a refund

see if they'll give me a refund

When an if-clause is an indirect question (and therefore if is replaceable by whether), it's nominal in nature, and can easily take will, or not, as desired.

I don't know [if / whether] George will be on time. / I wonder [if / whether] they will remember to bring the salads. / ...

In the conditional patterns, the if-clause has a different (adverbial) nature, and doesn't take will

If they (*will) give me a refund, I'll spend it on a new shirt. (* = ungrammatical)

-- unless there is emphasis on some benefit to the speaker or listener or both, as in bargaining. In other words, the idea of willingness is usually present in these odd-ball if ... will ... clauses.

If you will cook the meal, I will wash the dishes.

Re: functionality of would and could in the present and past

CalifJim — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 04:00:01 GMT

Anonymous
but don't have the same level of understanding as to the use of 'could' as conditional.

That's fairly easy to explain. The conditional meaning of could includes would:

I could go to the movie if I had enough money. = I would be able to go to the movie if I had enough money.

Could you do me a favor? = Would you be able to do me a favor?

Cheat on an exam? I could never do that! = Cheat on an exam? I would never be able to do that!

_______

to wonder introduces an indirect question, so these are not if ..., (then) ... structures:

I wonder [if / whether] I [can / could / would be able to] go to see a movie.

I wonder what I [can / could / would be able to] do to get the promotion.

I wonder what I [will / would] have to do to get the promotion.

However, you can add an if-clause within the scope of the indirect question:

I wonder what I {will / would} have to do if I {want / wanted} the promotion.

I wonder what I {can / could} do if I {want / wanted} the promotion.

I wonder [if / whether] I {can / could} buy a house like that if I {save / saved} my money for a few years.

{ } indicates correlated choices. (The first choice goes with the first choice; the second choice goes with the second choice.)

Re: Let's see who finishes/will finish first.

CalifJim — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 19:03:49 GMT

Only one s in present!!!

You can't use will with the stative verbs in this construction: [Let's see / Let me know / Tell me] plus an indirect question. I would not call these relative clauses.

to finish first - an action.

how you are - a state - not an action.

get there first - same as arrive first - an action.

you think - an internal activity; having an opinion - not an action.

_______

Thus, with the indirect question in brackets { }, ungrammatical choices prefixed with asterisk *:

[Let's see / Let me know / Tell me] {who [finishes / will finish / gets there / will get there] first}.

[Let's see / Let me know / Tell me] {how [you are / *you will be / what you think / *what you will think]}

_______

Your example with make sure does not belong to the pattern above. There's no indirect question.

Make sure (that) you come back soon.

A make sure that pattern is not followed by a future (will).

______

You can save yourself a lot of headaches by using the present tense for all of these. Even in cases where will is possible, it's almost always the inferior choice.

Re: when to?

CalifJim — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:28:55 GMT

Taka
I think what the author is trying to say is 'when you change trains',

Yes, that's most likely the intent.

Taka
but is that 'when to' grammatically acceptable?

Not here. No. when to clauses are indirect questions, hence, they function as noun phrases:

I didn't know when to change trains.

Be sure to tell him when to change trains.

They don't function as adverbs:

*You have to walk when to change trains.

*Be sure to read the posted signs when to change trains.

Re: Tense in conditional sentence

Tanit — Sun, 04 May 2008 10:56:28 GMT

Hi, N2G,

Besides in indirect questions (the examples previously given), if + will works also to indicate volition (or refusal in its negative form, "if + won't" ) or insistence, and, yes, it can be used at the beginning of a sentence. Here are the links to some other threads where these kinds of if + will were discussed. Hope you'll find them useful.

http://www.englishforums.com/English/IfAdjectiveClauses/zjqbg/post.htm
http://www.englishforums.com/English/NoCondition/vrcvh/post.htm
http://www.englishforums.com/English/IfClauseFuture/2/cwgxp/Post.htm

Re: indirect question

Cool Breeze — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 19:22:36 GMT

Hi NG

You are right. Indirect questions fall in three categories.

1. There is a word that can begin a clause but the word is not the subject.

What did he say? - Tell me what he said.

2. There isn't a word that can begin a clause. If or whether must be used.

Did he come in time? - Tell me if/whether he came in time .

3. A question word - in Scandinavia we call them interrogative pronouns - is the subject or a part of the subject.

What is wrong with this? - Tell me what is wrong with this.

Whose friend saw it? - Tell me whose friend saw it.

Because the interrogative word is the grammatical subject of the clause, there is no change in the word order.

confused about 'would'

New2grammar — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 08:10:33 GMT

I know 'would' carries many meanings. My problem is sometimes I find it difficult to tell which meaning the speaker uses. I think I understand its hypothetical usage, and in some contexts, its politeness usage. Below is a post that has several woulds I have trouble interpreting. I also copied a post on would by CalifJim for reference.

Your analysis is good. Context will determine if you're using the expression as an excuse to break off what you're doing. If you're calling the people you expect to meet, then you would (1)tell them the truth. You can say, "I'll be about five minutes late," or "I may be a little late." If you're speaking to someone who is about to make you late for an appointment, the expression would(2) mean, "Hey, I'm gonna be late if I don't split right now!" If you just say, "I'm gonna be late," you probably would(3) have already tipped the person off that you would(4) need to end the conversation soon, and as you suggest, you would(5) still expect to be on time if you left immediately.

1) I don't thing politeness is the intended meaning here. To my ear, it carries the meaning of preference.

2) would here means possible? I have zero confidence in this one.

3) it doesn't look like hypothetical usage to me because the if clause is in present tense

4) and 5) should follow the same reasoning for #3, whatever that is.

Please help! Thanks in advance!

CalifJim's explanation on would
Yes. I thought maybe that's what you were referring to.
would in an if clause is possible when the would or the entire if-clause is part of a formula of politeness. if you would be so kind is a typical example of if with would in a "politeness phrase". This formula is equivalent to please. This sort of if-clause does not even have to be classified as a true conditional even though it contains the word if.

The phrase would like as a polite way of saying want, and it too can appear in an if-clause. Note that the idiom would like counts as a present tense for purposes of tense combinations. That is, it may combine with the imperative or the future. The idiom would rather has the same property.

If you would like to have dinner with us tomorrow, please call and let us know before noon.
I'm sure that if he'd like to go with us, he'll tell us. (If he would like to go, he will tell us.)
If you'd rather wait until tomorrow, [just say so / I'll understand].

if-clauses that are part of an indirect question structure are also exempt from the rule about combining if and would:

I wonder if he would object to this procedure.
I don't know if I would agree.
We had not decided if we would go along with the plan.

With the exception of the indirect question structure, which is quite common, these are just a very, very small number of situations where if and would occur in the same clause. The main rule for 99.99% of cases is 'never' to place if and would together!

Re: did I / can I/ have I in affirmative clauses

Tanit — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 18:33:20 GMT

Sometimes in indirect questions, especially when the subject is too long (cannot think of an example right now, sorry!)
Ithink it is a simplier way to say them (they become just like directquestions. I noticed that lots of people -- in all languages -- are notvery good in using subordinate clauses. They start as if they wereintroducing a subordinate clause, then put a main clause instead...

Yes, I agree that sometimes we change our minds in the middle of a sentence, but I was thinking of something like:

Do you remember what the name of that woman was? (not inverted)

versus

Do you remember what was the name of that beautiful woman with long dark hair, green eyes and a fair complexion we met in John's office yesterday? (inverted because the subject -- I'm including here all of its qualifiers -- is too long)

I wonder if somebody would say:
Do you remember what the name of that beautiful woman with long dark hair, green eyes and a fair complexion we met in John's office yesterday was?
(I wouldn't ... I would forget what I was talking about!!!)

Re: did I / can I/ have I in affirmative clauses

giuseppe80 — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 13:42:15 GMT

Thank you very much for your aswer, Tanit, expecially for the first list you provide.

I had not included these cases:

In formal/emphatic conditional sentences: "Should you need further information, please call ..."
When expressing wishes starting with may: "May you find what you're searching for."

because they are not strictly affirmative sentences. They express a possibility or a wish.

Neither:

In short tags. "I like it!" "So do I"
Sometimes (quite literary) after as, so, than: "She was very pretty, as were her sisters."

because I think that here the reason of the inversion is the opposition topic-comment. ("I like it" is about like it or not, the new information provided by the other speaker is not a new verb, is the new subject 'I'. And the same goes with the sisters: they are not talking about the sisters, the topic is 'her' beauty, then the beauty remains the topic and the new information is that also her sisters are beautiful)

As for the indirect questions:

Sometimes in indirect questions, especially when the subject is too long (cannot think of an example right now, sorry!)

I think it is a simplier way to say them (they become just like direct questions. I noticed that lots of people -- in all languages -- are not very good in using subordinate clauses. They start as if they were introducing a subordinate clause, then put a main clause instead. When I was younger I was hosted by a British family in the summertime. One day my guest-father told me: "What I'll do tomorrow is: I prepare your packed lunch and leave it in the refrigerator")